Jump to content
bornontheblue

Corona Virus - How bad is it going to be?

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, mugtang said:

So according to McConnell the Dems are holding this up over the Airlines Carbon Emissions and tax credits for solar panels.

If that is true, then the Dems need held accountable by their electorate.  That is unacceptable.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our government is completely broken.  If they can’t even come together to get something done with the economy literally collapsing around them then there’s no phucking hope.  

  • Like 6

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not the fatality rate that I focus on but the hospitalization rate of all ages.

Our medical system is not designed to handle the potential nationwide surge in hospitalizations. If large numbers of younger age groups with no preexisting conditions also need hospitalization then the situation will get worse.

Quote

Fauci: U.S. 'looking very closely' at severe coronavirus symptoms in younger Americans

Top U.S. health officials are "looking very closely" at reports that a much higher percentage of younger Americans than expected need hospitalization as a result of contracting the coronavirus, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said Sunday.

Fauci was responding to new data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which, after studying more than 4,000 cases in the U.S., showed that about 40 percent of those who were hospitalized for the virus as of March 16 were ages 20 to 54. Among the most critical cases, 12 percent of intensive care admissions were among those ages 20 to 44, while 36 percent were for those 45 to 64.

...

"It looks like there is a big difference between that demography from China and what we're seeing in Europe," Fauci said. Data based on China's outbreak suggested that older people were more at risk.

"Now we have to look at the young people who are getting seriously ill from the European cohort and make sure that it isn't just driven by the fact that they have underlying conditions, because we know that underlying conditions — all bets are off no matter how young you are if you have an underlying, serious medical condition. You're going to potentially get into trouble," Fauci added.

"But if they don't have underlying conditions, that will be something we will have to really examine as to why we're seeing it here but we didn't see it in China.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/fauci-u-s-looking-very-closely-severe-coronavirus-symptoms-younger-n1166026

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, bornontheblue said:

So keeping companies afloat so they can pay their workers is doing nothing. you are dumb! 

You really need to dial back your unhealthy hatred for me. That's not what I said at all, and if you weren't so blinded by your irrationality, you would know that. The issue has to do with there being next to no checks or balances, as written, it's effectively without oversight as it pertains to corporations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Wyobraska said:

If that is true, then the Dems need held accountable by their electorate.  That is unacceptable.  

If that's true, then I definitely agree... something tells me that there's more to it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, retrofade said:

You really need to dial back your unhealthy hatred for me. That's not what I said at all, and if you weren't so blinded by your irrationality, you would know that. The issue has to do with there being next to no checks or balances, as written, it's effectively without oversight as it pertains to corporations. 

There definitely needs to be oversight with any money given to the private sector. @Wyobraska and I have been venting about corporations making stupid business decisions in order to increase their executive bonuses, but are now asking for handouts to keep them afloat. Any money given needs to be paid back, and buybacks halted until the loans are repaid.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bob said:

the congressional Democrats can go the hell

So you support the Republican plan to provide secret payments to select corporations.  That the American public should not be informed of what companies receive government bailouts.  Interesting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, retrofade said:

If that's true, then I definitely agree... something tells me that there's more to it though.

Wait...you are telling me that the other side might play politics with their accusations and that there might be more to the story than just what some politician on the other side of the aisle is saying?  Good thing you practice this line of thinking.  :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, retrofade said:

If that's true, then I definitely agree... something tells me that there's more to it though.

From the NY Times:

At the heart of the impasse is a $425 billion fund created by the bill that the Federal Reserve could leverage for loans to assist broad groups of distressed companies, and an additional $75 billion it would provide for industry-specific loans. Democrats have raised concerns that the funds do not have rules for transparency or enough guardrails to make sure companies do not use the funds to enrich themselves or take government money and lay off workers. They also argue the measure would give Mr. Mnuchin too much discretion to decide which companies receive the funds, calling the proposal a “slush fund” for the administration.

As the legislation is currently written, Mr. Mnuchin would not have to disclose the recipients until six months after the loans were dispersed. Some Democrats also objected to loopholes in the legislation they said could allow Mr. Trump’s real estate empire to take advantage of the federal aid.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, mugtang said:

So according to McConnell the Dems are holding this up over the Airlines Carbon Emissions and tax credits for solar panels.

There is no reason to believe McConnell about anything. And yes, I am aware the Dems have trust issues themselves.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NVGiant said:

From the NY Times:

At the heart of the impasse is a $425 billion fund created by the bill that the Federal Reserve could leverage for loans to assist broad groups of distressed companies, and an additional $75 billion it would provide for industry-specific loans. Democrats have raised concerns that the funds do not have rules for transparency or enough guardrails to make sure companies do not use the funds to enrich themselves or take government money and lay off workers. They also argue the measure would give Mr. Mnuchin too much discretion to decide which companies receive the funds, calling the proposal a “slush fund” for the administration.

As the legislation is currently written, Mr. Mnuchin would not have to disclose the recipients until six months after the loans were dispersed. Some Democrats also objected to loopholes in the legislation they said could allow Mr. Trump’s real estate empire to take advantage of the federal aid.

Which tells me that the truth is somewhere between that and McConnell's claims that the Dems were holding it up over Airlines Carbon Emissions and tax credits for solar panels.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, NVGiant said:

There is no reason to believe McConnell about anything. And yes, I am aware the Dems have trust issues themselves.

Cocaine Mitch is just pissed off that this is taking too long and preventing him from his true purpose --- convincing Federal Judges to retire so that they can continue to pack the judiciary.

  • Like 1
  • Super-Mega Idiot 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bornontheblue said:

According to the WSJ article I just read the legislation included loan forgiveness to small businesses if they used the funds to keep their workers on the payroll. This needs to get done yesterday. 

Good.  Just eliminate the secrecy and require each bailout recipient to be identified and the amounts provided identified and there should be no problem.  

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sandiegopete said:

Good.  Just eliminate the secrecy and requite each bailout recipient to be identified and the amounts provided identified and there should be no problem.  

That seems like a pretty simple fix to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, retrofade said:

Which tells me that the truth is somewhere between that and McConnell's claims that the Dems were holding it up over Airlines Carbon Emissions and tax credits for solar panels.

That isn't even very believable. I expect a better quality of bullshit from McConnell. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...