Cases rising or dropping by you?

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I think you are reading into my posts things that aren't there.

Honestly? I think you are.

I never said the pandemic would be over if a localized approach was there, you just said that. If you follow my comments it's about issues with compliance, issues with resources, issues over court battles over who has the control and who doesn't that have been playing out. Issues with a sweeping restriction like forcing all xyz businesses to close because one or two areas of a state or province are experiencing issues rather than only having restrictions in certain places AND letting that decision be at the hands of that given community. You're the one who brought up people moving around and now that the pandemic would be over if a localized approach worked. My discussion was about was giving the control to a given community which is something that is gaining more traction throughout.

Chalk it up to crossed wires if you want and let's just have us both move on

 

[godisney14]

That's not what a localized approach is about. Maybe you're thinking something else?

A localized approach just means it puts the decisions in the hands of a given local community (often a local health department, county and hospital system) rather than only at the hands of the governor. The needs of the people typically can be more closely addressed and quicker. A local health department can more closely monitor hospitalizations and discuss with local leaders and make decisions based on that; they are after all in the community they are serving. {ETA: To put it another way some states the governor has prohibited the counties from making decisions in what most would consider a negative way. Some have it where they cannot do a more strict guideline only an equal or lesser guideline. A localized approach would allow that given area to do what they see fit and in those areas where they want stricter guidelines to be followed they are now free to do so. Another example: A state without a mask mandate, a localized approach means they can enact a mask mandate without respects to going through the governor rather than being barred from doing so because the governor said so}.

I don’t disagree.
But, to put things into the local health officer or dept’s hands, you need the mayor’s full buy-in with what the health officer or dept is wanting to accomplish. Nearly 200 health officers thus far in CA have resigned because of constant death threats and stalking by the vociferous objectors. Otherwise, it would be just like the WH and CDC in disagreements.

 

[jamescanuck2001]

Well let me explain why leaving it entirely local will not work.

Let's say New York is a hot spot, and Boston has no cases. New York imposes heavy restrictions, Boston has none. Thanksgiving comes, some New Yorkers cross state lines to Boston to be with family. The virus takes root and starts to spread exponentially through the Boston area.

Local authorities can do nothing to minimize or stop the risk of this happening (which obviously is happening all across the USA every day). Only state or national authorities can put in the necessary controls.

 

[RexDVC64]

I have no problem with anyone who wears a mask just as I have no problem with those who don't. As long as everyone has the choice, I'm good with it.

 

[jamescanuck2001]

I have no problem with anyone who wears a mask just as I have no problem with those who don't. As long as everyone has the choice, I'm good with it.

And this is why 220,000 dead and many more to come.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I don’t disagree.
But, to put things into the local health officer or dept’s hands, you need the mayor’s full buy-in with what the health officer or dept is wanting to accomplish. Nearly 200 health officers thus far in CA have resigned because of constant death threats and stalking by the vociferous objectors.

And I think that's been a product unfortunately of the tug of war. If you have this constant tug of war you're never going to get the peace you need. And if you consider that in CA the governor has had a lot of control and a lot of push back from local communities feeling like the governor is tone deaf realistically (though I don't agree with it) I can understand why they may not be listening to the local health department. Ideally everyone would be on the same page, but even if the governor is the only one making the decisions for the whole state not everyone will be on the same page, clearly we've seen that one.

It's a tricky situation but what we ask of our local officials is to be the voice of the community, to consider us citizens. The reality is some areas are doing just that. They just happen to be on the other side of the fence than what others feel.

I *think* down the road we may find that a mixture of things worked rather than only one or the other. In my original comments that's why I said I advocate for my governor to have the sway (though we keep getting outbid for stuff) for testing supplies, PPE, and monetary Federal aid not spending that time in courts. And for better or worse there are pros and cons to having the ability to say "hey I don't know that you have the legal authority to do this".

*By the way, it's terrible anyone would get death threats that's just awful thing to do...so is stalking obviously.

 

[RamblingMad]

Cases are spiking in the Midwest: IL, WI, MI, and OH. This isn’t good.

And did you see those crazy election lines in GA? We really don’t need an election super spreader event on top of Thanksgiving and Christmas this year.

 

[RexDVC64]

And this is why 220,000 dead and many more to come.

You, as an individual citizen, have the right to live your life as you see fit. I have the right to live mine differently. That's what makes this country the greatest in the world - the freedoms we have and share.

 

[jamescanuck2001]

You, as an individual citizen, have the right to live your life as you see fit. I have the right to live mine differently. That's what makes this country the greatest in the world - the freedoms we have and share.

So you are free to drive your car at 160 km/hr if you see fit? Endangering the lives of others by doing so?

 

[RexDVC64]

So you are free to drive your car at 160 km/hr if you see fit? Endangering the lives of others by doing so?

I don't make a habit of speeding, but I see others speeding all the time.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Well let me explain why leaving it entirely local will not work.

Let's say New York is a hot spot, and Boston has no cases. New York imposes heavy restrictions, Boston has none. Thanksgiving comes, some New Yorkers cross state lines to Boston to be with family. The virus takes root and starts to spread exponentially through the Boston area.

Local authorities can do nothing to minimize or stop the risk of this happening (which obviously is happening all across the USA every day). Only state or national authorities can put in the necessary controls.

Since you mentioned NY, they do have heavy restrictions but recently 8 or 9 neighborhoods have had a large resurgence in positivity in cases. NJ is also on the rise in cases and they have heavy restrictions (they are part of the tri-state regional area). Both of those places by the way aren't rising as a result of travel. They are get togethers. Yes some cross state lines but in the tri-state area that's a given part of life. As is in my metro which spans 2 states. A lot of people work in one live in another.

I think you think I was talking about an all or nothing. It's not about taking all control away from a state/governor. It's about adjusting what they do.

The discussion originally started discussing bars and restaurants. A state-wide approach means shutting all the bars and restaurants down regardless of what one area has or doesn't have which has, at times, followed legal battles, contention between a given community and the governor and more. Shutting down businesses as a state-wide approach means shutting them all down regardless of what one area has or doesn't have---that was one of the reasons I brought up the rural county that didn't see a case until 3 1/2 months after the stay at home order ended. A localized approach allows a given area to say "hey we need to curtail this so let's do xyz". A localized approach would have meant that rural county in my state could have chosen to close businesses down in August NOT in March-May. At least for me it's never been about one way or the other.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

And did you see those crazy election lines in GA?

I think it was Last Week Tonight that I was watching where they interviewed a guy who was in line for like 6 or 8 hours can't remember but anyways the guy next to him in line mentioned that they had been in line since yesterday...and it hit the guy like yeah you're right.

 

[RamblingMad]

I think it was Last Week Tonight that I was watching where they interviewed a guy who was in line for like 6 or 8 hours can't remember but anyways the guy next to him in line mentioned that they had been in line since yesterday...and it hit the guy like yeah you're right.

Standing in these long lines for hours can’t be good once they get inside. This behavior should have been thought about ahead of time to reduce spread. I’ll be watching GAs numbers in the next two weeks to see if they have a spike.

 

[jamescanuck2001]

Since you mentioned NY, they do have heavy restrictions but recently 8 or 9 neighborhoods have had a large resurgence in positivity in cases. NJ is also on the rise in cases and they have heavy restrictions (they are part of the tri-state regional area). Both of those places by the way aren't rising as a result of travel. They are get togethers. Yes some cross state lines but in the tri-state area that's a given part of life. As is in my metro which spans 2 states. A lot of people work in one live in another.

I think you think I was talking about an all or nothing. It's not about taking all control away from a state/governor. It's about adjusting what they do.

The discussion originally started discussing bars and restaurants. A state-wide approach means shutting all the bars and restaurants down regardless of what one area has or doesn't have which has, at times, followed legal battles, contention between a given community and the governor and more. Shutting down businesses as a state-wide approach means shutting them all down regardless of what one area has or doesn't have---that was one of the reasons I brought up the rural county that didn't see a case until 3 1/2 months after the stay at home order ended. A localized approach allows a given area to say "hey we need to curtail this so let's do xyz". A localized approach would have meant that rural county in my state could have chosen to close businesses down in August NOT in March-May. At least for me it's never been about one way or the other.

Ah I see, I didn't read the whole thread. My apologies.

But anyway, as I posted earlier the virus will find the areas with lax controls and take root there and spread. This is inevitable. So there has to be strong statewide and nationwide controls. Unfortunately the leadership is not there for this to happen. And you know what? It's not that hard to control the spread of this virus, and it doesn't mean business shutdown either. Simple things, actually. It's attitudes like RexDVC64's that mask wearing is a personal choice that don't allow these simple things that cause no one any hardship to be widely practiced.

 

[jamescanuck2001]

I don't make a habit of speeding, but I see others speeding all the time.

Nice and do you think it's Ok for someone else to drive at 160 km/hr?

 

[RexDVC64]

Ah I see, I didn't read the whole thread. My apologies.

But anyway, as I posted earlier the virus will find the areas with lax controls and take root there and spread. This is inevitable. So there has to be strong statewide and nationwide controls. Unfortunately the leadership is not there for this to happen. And you know what? It's not that hard to control the spread of this virus, and it doesn't mean business shutdown either. Simple things, actually. It's attitudes like RexDVC64's that mask wearing is a personal choice that don't allow these simple things that cause no one any hardship to be widely practiced.

As stated in the US Constitiution, it's "We the people". Not we as a collective but we as the individual citizens. Our country was founded on the rights of the INDIVIDUAL, not the rights of the collective.

Our Supreme Court has affirmed this in case after case.

 

[jamescanuck2001]

As stated in the US Constitiution, it's "We the people". Not we as a collective but we as the individual citizens. Our country was founded on the rights of the INDIVIDUAL, not the rights of the collective.

Our Supreme Court has affirmed this in case after case.

Up to the point where individual rights cause harm to others. Affirmed by the Supreme Court.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Cases are spiking in the Midwest: IL, WI, MI, and OH. This isn’t good.

I just saw a local article:

• New Mexico – Average of 457 cases per day, an increase of 123 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Vermont – Average of nine cases per day, an increase of 110 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• New Hampshire – Average of 78 cases per day, an increase of 101 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Montana – Average of 611 cases per day, an increase of 91 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Connecticut – Average of 326 cases per day, an increase of 80 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Indiana – Average of 1,655 cases per day, an increase of 66 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Wyoming – Average of 183 cases per day, an increase of 65 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Alaska – Average of 193 cases per day, an increase of 64 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Rhode Island – Average of 199 cases per day, an increase of 63 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Arizona – Average of 763 cases per day, an increase of 59 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Colorado – Average of 894 cases per day, an increase of 57 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Michigan – Average of 1,483 cases per day, an increase of 56 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Nebraska – Average of 767 cases per day, an increase of 55 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• North Dakota – Average of 610 cases per day, an increase of 54 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Ohio – Average of 1,654 cases per day, an increase of 53 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• South Dakota – Average of 653 cases per day, an increase of 50 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Mississippi – Average of 760 cases per day, an increase of 49 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Illinois – Average of 3,069 cases per day, an increase of 48 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Virginia – Average of 1,058 cases per day, an increase of 42 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Pennsylvania – Average of 1,362 cases per day, an increase of 39 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Tennessee – Average of 1,870 cases per day, an increase of 38 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Idaho – Average of 660 cases per day, an increase of 37 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• North Carolina – Average of 1,943 cases per day, an increase of 36 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• New Jersey – Average of 835 cases per day, an increase of 35 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• West Virginia – Average of 251 cases per day, an increase of 33 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Nevada – Average of 587 cases per day, an increase of 30 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• New York – Average of 1,329 cases per day, an increase of 29 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Washington – Average of 659 cases per day, an increase of 29 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Minnesota – Average of 1,312 cases per day, an increase of 28 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Kentucky – Average of 980 cases per day, an increase of 27 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Missouri – Average of 1,916 cases per day, an increase of 27 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Wisconsin – Average of 3,124 cases per day, an increase of 25 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Utah – Average of 1,216 cases per day, an increase of 23 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Alabama – Average of 1,027 cases per day, an increase of 21 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Oregon – Average of 345 cases per day, an increase of 21 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Massachusetts – Average of 663 cases per day, an increase of 20 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Kansas – Average of 788 cases per day, an increase of 19 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Florida – Average of 2,711 cases per day, an increase of 18 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Oklahoma – Average of 1,182 cases per day, an increase of 16 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Georgia – Average of 1,409 cases per day, an increase of 14 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Iowa – Average of 1,044 cases per day, an increase of 13 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• South Carolina – Average of 907 cases per day, an increase of 13 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Arkansas – Average of 911 cases per day, an increase of 11 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Maryland – Average of 589 cases per day, an increase of 11 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Texas – Average of 4,587 cases per day, an increase of 8 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Louisiana – Average of 543 cases per day, an increase of 7 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Delaware – Average of 125 cases per day, an increase of 5 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• California – Average of 3,285 cases per day, an increase of 2 percent from the average two weeks earlier.

States seeing case decreases (by percentages):

• Hawaii – Average of 89 cases per day, a decrease of 17 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Maine – Average of 28 cases per day, a decrease of 9 percent from the average two weeks earlier.

Some of those states are shocking like CT, NJ, RI, NY, VT. I know a lot of people were saying "how come states didn't learn from NY"...the virus just is running circles and will come back (at least at this point). By comparison WI ain't looking too bad (that NOT what I'm saying though). Obviously this is just looking at a high-level overview and not getting into if it was superspreader events or whatnot that contributed to it.

 

[RexDVC64]

Med professionals advise on masks, distance and hand washing because it's helpful, not prevention.
You choose to wear a mask, suit up.... If you don't, up to you to assume said risk.

Each person should have the choice of going out to any public arena with or without. But more important, no more lockdowns.

 

[robinb]

I just saw a local article:

• New Mexico – Average of 457 cases per day, an increase of 123 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Vermont – Average of nine cases per day, an increase of 110 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• New Hampshire – Average of 78 cases per day, an increase of 101 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Montana – Average of 611 cases per day, an increase of 91 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Connecticut – Average of 326 cases per day, an increase of 80 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Indiana – Average of 1,655 cases per day, an increase of 66 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Wyoming – Average of 183 cases per day, an increase of 65 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Alaska – Average of 193 cases per day, an increase of 64 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Rhode Island – Average of 199 cases per day, an increase of 63 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Arizona – Average of 763 cases per day, an increase of 59 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Colorado – Average of 894 cases per day, an increase of 57 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Michigan – Average of 1,483 cases per day, an increase of 56 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Nebraska – Average of 767 cases per day, an increase of 55 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• North Dakota – Average of 610 cases per day, an increase of 54 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Ohio – Average of 1,654 cases per day, an increase of 53 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• South Dakota – Average of 653 cases per day, an increase of 50 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Mississippi – Average of 760 cases per day, an increase of 49 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Illinois – Average of 3,069 cases per day, an increase of 48 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Virginia – Average of 1,058 cases per day, an increase of 42 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Pennsylvania – Average of 1,362 cases per day, an increase of 39 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Tennessee – Average of 1,870 cases per day, an increase of 38 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Idaho – Average of 660 cases per day, an increase of 37 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• North Carolina – Average of 1,943 cases per day, an increase of 36 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• New Jersey – Average of 835 cases per day, an increase of 35 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• West Virginia – Average of 251 cases per day, an increase of 33 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Nevada – Average of 587 cases per day, an increase of 30 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• New York – Average of 1,329 cases per day, an increase of 29 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Washington – Average of 659 cases per day, an increase of 29 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Minnesota – Average of 1,312 cases per day, an increase of 28 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Kentucky – Average of 980 cases per day, an increase of 27 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Missouri – Average of 1,916 cases per day, an increase of 27 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Wisconsin – Average of 3,124 cases per day, an increase of 25 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Utah – Average of 1,216 cases per day, an increase of 23 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Alabama – Average of 1,027 cases per day, an increase of 21 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Oregon – Average of 345 cases per day, an increase of 21 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Massachusetts – Average of 663 cases per day, an increase of 20 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Kansas – Average of 788 cases per day, an increase of 19 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Florida – Average of 2,711 cases per day, an increase of 18 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Oklahoma – Average of 1,182 cases per day, an increase of 16 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Georgia – Average of 1,409 cases per day, an increase of 14 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Iowa – Average of 1,044 cases per day, an increase of 13 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• South Carolina – Average of 907 cases per day, an increase of 13 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Arkansas – Average of 911 cases per day, an increase of 11 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Maryland – Average of 589 cases per day, an increase of 11 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Texas – Average of 4,587 cases per day, an increase of 8 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Louisiana – Average of 543 cases per day, an increase of 7 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Delaware – Average of 125 cases per day, an increase of 5 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• California – Average of 3,285 cases per day, an increase of 2 percent from the average two weeks earlier.

States seeing case decreases (by percentages):

• Hawaii – Average of 89 cases per day, a decrease of 17 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Maine – Average of 28 cases per day, a decrease of 9 percent from the average two weeks earlier.

Some of those states are shocking like CT, NJ, RI, NY, VT. I know a lot of people were saying "how come states didn't learn from NY"...the virus just is running circles and will come back (at least at this point). By comparison WI ain't looking too bad (that NOT what I'm saying though). Obviously this is just looking at a high-level overview and not getting into if it was superspreader events or whatnot that contributed to it.

• Connecticut – Average of 326 cases per day, an increase of 80 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• New Jersey – Average of 835 cases per day, an increase of 35 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Rhode Island – Average of 199 cases per day, an increase of 63 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• New York – Average of 1,329 cases per day, an increase of 29 percent from the average two weeks earlier.
• Vermont – Average of nine cases per day, an increase of 110 percent from the average two weeks earlier.

The SUM of cases in CT, NJ, RI, NY and VT is less than the number of cases in Wisconsin.

• Wisconsin – Average of 3,124 cases per day, an increase of 25 percent from the average two weeks earlier.