2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[Onions]

Originally Posted by rman112

Yes, but unless we have it in massive, massive quantities, then what good does a marginal uptake do?

Absolutely nothing. We would all have to have been tested multiple times. Testing in the billions to accomplish this little pipe dream.

It is not happening anywhere on planet earth to the level that is sufficient.

[Dbacksbaseball]

Originally Posted by Onions

Absolutely nothing. We would all have to have been tested multiple times. Testing in the billions to accomplish this little pipe dream.

It is not happening anywhere on planet earth to the level that is sufficient.

Virtually, in this pipe dream test would have to be run on a smart phone. Test when you go to the store, test when you go to the ball field, test when you go to get food.

We have to get over the idea of testing and tracking in mass quantities out of the way. With the amount of Nursing home and prexisting deaths being the overwhelming mass majority, the discussion needs to turn to how to we keep them safe, while letting others get back to normal.

[blackbears86]

Originally Posted by rman112

Just get to the point.

Example: You and a friend go to a topps transcendant party. There's 1000 people there. You think several people (maybe 20 maybe 100 who knows?) have corona, but you can only test 50 because that's all the tests you have.


What do you do?


Early and frequent testing helps gives you an accurate number of what you are dealing with so you can isolate and treat. Something the US did not have right from the start.

NOT blaming trumpo. I don't think anyone here was prepared for this. Not Trumpo, not Fauci, and certainly not the CDC.





EDIT: Not calling for widespread testing, but we need more than is available now.

[kerg]

Originally Posted by blackbears86

Something the US did not have right from the start.

NOT blaming trumpo. I don't think anyone here was prepared for this. Not Trumpo, not Fauci, and certainly not the CDC.

How do you have tests from the start for something new?

More tests is easy to say, but is the infrastructure in place to even crank out more tests. Hell, are the materials used to create the tests even readily available (no, I don't have those answers)

[rman112]

Originally Posted by blackbears86

Example: You and a friend go to a topps transcendant party. There's 1000 people there. You think several people (maybe 20 maybe 100 who knows?) have corona, but you can only test 50 because that's all the tests you have.


What do you do?


Early and frequent testing helps gives you an accurate number of what you are dealing with so you can isolate and treat. Something the US did not have right from the start.

NOT blaming trumpo. I don't think anyone here was prepared for this. Not Trumpo, not Fauci, and certainly not the CDC.





EDIT: Not calling for widespread testing, but we need more than is available now.

I guess I legitimately legitimate don't understand what you're trying to say. You quoted a post and highlighted this part:

"Trump's failure in this whole situation is not prioritizing our capacity to test. That delay and lack of data it created made everyone's job on both sides of the aisle much harder."

I don't get the rationale of "___ is a problem", without it leading to "____ should be done", or in retrospect, "____ should have been done". Is that not just complaining?

[blackbears86]

Originally Posted by kerg

How do you have tests from the start for something new?

Even Now we don't have enough tests.

[Onions]

Originally Posted by blackbears86

And here is one of he best posts of this thread that will be ignored by everyone.

Originally Posted by blackbears86

Early and frequent testing helps gives you an accurate number of what you are dealing with so you can isolate and treat. Something the US did not have right from the start.

NOT blaming trumpo. I don't think anyone here was prepared for this. Not Trumpo, not Fauci, and certainly not the CDC.





EDIT: Not calling for widespread testing, but we need more than is available now.

So the Pac213up point was not a great post. Got it.

[Onions]

Originally Posted by blackbears86

Even Now we don't have enough tests.

Better get China to crank out more supplies then.

[blackbears86]

Originally Posted by rman112

I guess I legitimately legitimate don't understand what you're trying to say. You quoted a post and highlighted this part:

"Trump's failure in this whole situation is not prioritizing our capacity to test. That delay and lack of data it created made everyone's job on both sides of the aisle much harder."

I don't get the rationale of "___ is a problem", without it leading to "____ should be done", or in retrospect, "____ should have been done". Is that not just complaining?

OK, you got me.......It's not trumpo's fault, it's several agencies.

[rman112]

Originally Posted by blackbears86

OK, you got me.......It's not trumpo's fault, it's several agencies.

That TDS might be more infectious than the virus!

I kid, I kid. That one was lighthearted.

[blackbears86]

Originally Posted by Onions

Better get China to crank out more supplies then.

Uummm.. who cares about China Onions, maybe you? I could care less about China. Do they make testing kits? If they do sure, let's get them over here.

I just want more tests available so I assess my patients who might be at risk.

[kerg]

Originally Posted by blackbears86

Even Now we don't have enough tests.

Ok. Ask yourself why.

They need to be produced. Everything that needs to be produced as limitations dictated by current production capacity and the raw materials necessary to create said item.

Everything has limits. You can't just snap your fingers and go 'more tests for all'. I guess if you want to say that Trump should have directed everyone to stop what they are doing and create tests, then there is a trade off because whatever said entity was directed to create tests, will now not be doing something else.

If you find an article on the production of tests and limitations, I'd love to read it as I'd be interested myself.

[blackbears86]

Originally Posted by rman112

That TDS might be more infectious than the virus!

I kid, I kid. That one was lighthearted.

No problem It's all good rman.




I think I do have TDS. I had such high hopes for trumpo. It's a damn shame what he's become. He sucks just like all the others that came before him.

[Whodatiz]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

If my math is correct and we bail out the states to the tune of ~$4 trillion, then give every American $2,000 a month every month we're in a national emergency, (+$2,000 per kid) ... Trout prices are gonna go NUTS!

LOL.

SleeperCards right now:

[jdandns]

Originally Posted by Dbacksbaseball

LOL, yea....did you really think I didnt have the link.....quoting a different conversation.

https://twitter.com/brithume/status/1246156119938080776

'Well, I, Uhh, obviously you need to take it seriously and do the kinds of things that the CDC and Department of Homeland security are doing. But this is not a major threat for the people of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States should be worried about." - Dr. Fauci 1/21/20

This crushes your argument in totality. He acknowledges the DOHS is working on it--which would be a presidential directive--and says that its not a major threat to anyone in the US.

Simply put if the main advisor was under prepared, the president was going to be as well.

First of all, a transcript of Fauci's words do not constitute my arguments. More to the point, the buck stops with Trump. He's the boss, and he's told us over and over that he has only the "best people" working for him. The President sure hasn't been shy about replacing many, many others. If Fauci was so clearly lacking, why didn't the President replace him in the three years before this? And why hasn't he fired him yet, if Fauci's the one responsible for Trump looking so bad throughout all of this.

You think quoting Fauci's words from another 5 weeks before his words of Feb. 29 that you mischaracterized is helpful to your case?
I don't think you understand how this works.

[blackbears86]

Originally Posted by kerg

Ok. Ask yourself why.

They need to be produced. Everything that needs to be produced as limitations dictated by current production capacity and the raw materials necessary to create said item.

Everything has limits. You can't just snap your fingers and go 'more tests for all'. I guess if you want to say that Trump should have directed everyone to stop what they are doing and create tests, then there is a trade off because whatever said entity was directed to create tests, will now not be doing something else.

If you find an article on the production of tests and limitations, I'd love to read it as I'd be interested myself.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but why do other countries have a proportionately higher number of tests being conducted than the US?

[Whodatiz]

Originally Posted by blackbears86

Uummm.. who cares about China Onions, maybe you? I could care less about China. Do they make testing kits? If they do sure, let's get them over here.

I just want more tests available so I assess my patients who might be at risk.

Do you assess your patients with that god awful grammar?

[Whodatiz]

Speaking of testing kits, has anyone seen the story on the Tanzanian President sending kits back based on his papayas testing positive for the China virus?

[blackbears86]

Originally Posted by Whodatiz

Do you assess your patients with that god awful grammar?

everyday buddy!

[Siberian13]

Originally Posted by Whodatiz

Do you assess your patients with that god awful grammar?

No but he does add an O to the end of everyone's name he treats

[Onions]

Originally Posted by blackbears86

Uummm.. who cares about China Onions, maybe you? I could care less about China. Do they make testing kits? If they do sure, let's get them over here.

I just want more tests available so I assess my patients who might be at risk.

They actually do. And their tests were junk. They withheld information to make accurate tests. The world was forced to learn on its own.

Everyone should be worried about China. We make very little here. We are almost entirely dependent on China to make the things we need. Including the materials needed to fight this virus.

Would you give your patients a test that was only 50-60% accurate? What good is that?

[blackbears86]

Originally Posted by Onions

They actually do. And their tests were junk. They withheld information to make accurate tests. The world was forced to learn on its own.

Everyone should be worried about China. We make very little here. We are almost entirely dependent on China to make the things we need. Including the materials needed to fight this virus.

Would you give your patients a test that was only 50-60% accurate? What good is that?

Not sure about your obsession with China, but The tests we use at my hospital are not made in China.

[Onions]

Originally Posted by blackbears86

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but why do other countries have a proportionately higher number of tests being conducted than the US?

Less people. I live in ND. We are currently 3rd in testing per capita. It becomes far easier when you have less people to test.

[blackbears86]

Originally Posted by Siberian13

No but he does add an O to the end of everyone's name he treats

Just trumpo sibs

[Dbacksbaseball]

Originally Posted by jdandns

First of all, a transcript of Fauci's words do not constitute my arguments. More to the point, the buck stops with Trump. He's the boss, and he's told us over and over that he has only the "best people" working for him. The President sure hasn't been shy about replacing many, many others. If Fauci was so clearly lacking, why didn't the President replace him in the three years before this? And why hasn't he fired him yet, if Fauci's the one responsible for Trump looking so bad throughout all of this.

You think quoting Fauci's words from another 5 weeks before his words of Feb. 29 that you mischaracterized is helpful to your case?
I don't think you understand how this works.

Dude you quoted a Senator on Feb 5......Honest question...do you not understand the timelines of your own argument.

I wish you were just trolling, but unfortunately...this is you.