by Kerry Dougherty

Oh look.

We’re coming up on the one-year anniversary of 15 Days to Slow the Spread. Remember that? The big lie that if we simply shut down the country for just two weeks, it would stop the coronavirus from rampaging coast to coast and allow hospitals prepare for the onslaught.

They warned us that if we didn’t take a two-week timeout we’d turn into Italy.

And we believed them.

Well, 15 days didn’t slow the spread. And neither did 10 months. Meanwhile, we never turned into Italy and hospital staffs had time to make cute TikTok videos.

In fact, is was January 2021 (and December in some places) that set records for cases from coast to coast. That was also true internationally, even in countries that don’t celebrate Christmas. It seemed to make no difference if the states had mask mandates or lockdowns.

The pattern was eerily similar across much of the world. Almost as if mitigation didn’t matter.

Yesterday Governors Greg Abbott of Texas and Tate Reeves of Mississippi joined a handful of other red state executives when they reopened their states, scrapped mask mandates and ended emergency orders that turned American children into mental patients, killed countless small businesses, led to isolation and depression and ultimately did little to contain the virus.

For the record, I objected to the stomping of civil rights from the start. I wrote this on March 24, 2020 when Gov. Ralph Northam became the first in the nation to close public schools for the rest of the school year:

With yesterday’s hasty and heavy-handed move Northam slyly signaled that the other shutdowns he’s ordered are also going to last months rather than weeks. Almost as if he’s been spoon-feeding his plans to the public rather than being honest.

Unless I’m completely misreading the current mood, ordinary folks aren’t going to stand for indefinite, months-long shutdowns. A few weeks. Maybe. Months? Watch out.

In the words of William Butler Yeats, “The centre cannot hold.”

Hah. I was wrong. I overestimated how much Americans valued their civil liberties. I underestimated just how willingly they would surrender them.

Now that government officials have seen how obedient Americans are when you gin up the hysteria, I worry about the next nationwide emergency. And there will be one. Trust me.

But first we need to shake off the shackles of this one.

Let’s applaud the governors who trust their citizens to take the necessary precautions to protect themselves. Just because baseball stadiums will be at capacity doesn’t mean you have to be in the stands. Just because clubs and bars will be open doesn’t mean you have to sidle up and order a drink. If you still want to wear a mask — or two — no one will stop you.

Anyone who is frightened or vulnerable can continue to stay home and order from Amazon.

Naturally, the lockdown lobby is incensed. They worry that if cases don’t soar in these “free states,” they too will have to loosen restrictions and relinquish their control of the masses.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, the subject of a recall petition with 1.8 million signatures, tweeted two words at Governor Abbot yesterday: Absolutely reckless.

This is the loon who told Californians to wear masks between bites of food and then was photographed at a crowded indoor table at the French Laundry, one of the world’s most expensive restaurants, with no social distancing, no mask.

If you find yourself hoping that Texas and Mississippi have a surge in COVID cases, you’re a horrible person.

Frankly, if you never missed a paycheck during the lockdowns at least have the decency to remain silent when governors boldly try to give their embattled citizens a way to reclaim their lives.

All along the shutdowns were the conceit of the middle and upper classes who hid in their McMansions and let the working class fetch things for them, while whining about how “everyone” should just stay home.

Surely even those who initially supported the lockdowns must see the damage they caused. If the blue state governors don’t follow the lead of their counterparts in the red states and cancel their endless emergency orders, people may finally decide to ignore the orders and take their civil liberties back.

Variations of this have circulated on social media for months:

It’s just 15 days.

It’s just a month.

It’s just a mask.

It’s just the schools.

It’s just non-essential business.

It’s just the bars.

It’s just the gyms.

It’s just the churches.

It’s just no household mixing.

It’s just Halloween.

It’s just Thanksgiving

It’s just Christmas.

It’s just New Years.

It’s just until a vaccine.

It’s just two masks.

It’s just until COVID disappears.

Fact is, it’s forever. Until we say “enough.”


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

64 responses to “Enough”

  1. Kathleen Smith Avatar
    Kathleen Smith

    Kerry, I agree. Last year when I heard it might be three years, I thought that the person had over done the mark. Now I am not so sure.

  2. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Uh yep! Just shutdown for two weeks and the “only 15 people who came in from China, and all but one of them, are already better” will get over it and it will be gone.

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      CDC website today reports it has examined 478K death certificates (always runs a behind) and tagged them as deaths from or with COVID. It also reports the “excess deaths” for the period could be as high as 610K. The difference? Could be people who died prematurely from the impact of all the restrictions, the fear preventing people from seeking medical care, the stress….whether the cure has been worse than the diseases is debatable, but the cure has been killing people too.

      Bringing up statements made during the initial phase is just snark. And politicians of every stripe made them. Most — if they admitted it — were merely repeating things actual doctors had told them. Even St. Fauci the Flawless screwed up big time in the early days. I bet half the thinks Trump said he was repeating Fauci.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        For all the folks expressing doubt about how we proceeded in response to COVID, seems like a ton of people are demanding the vaccine… you know, the one that science recommends…. the same science that drove the other COVID policies…

        So now, the anti-maskers are showing up in stores not wearing masks – whether they have the vaccine or not…

        sorta says something about us as a society….

      2. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        I was wrong. Maybe Sherlock ain’t Captain Hindsight.

        So, people with compromising conditions who, had they sought medical assistance, would have increased their risk of COVID?

  3. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    Dr. Gottlieb was on CNBC this morning hinting darkly about the new CDC guidance out in a day or so. Vaccines? Ha. The push will be to maintain the restrictions and the fear. He for one apparently thinks they will be too dire. Maybe if everybody in the room has had the shots, yadda yadda. I’m still convinced there will be a battle over schools for the 21-22 session, with the excuse being 1) kids aren’t vaccinated and 2) new strains! I bet we’re still under an official “state of emergency” at least through next winter.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      You are just loving this, aren’t you? And you have the nerve to accuse others of stoking.

  4. Publius Avatar

    Why, it’s almost as if the virus had a mind of its own…
    As if this virus mysteriously wouldn’t follow the pattern of all other viruses was an intentional lie…
    As if our experts pretended to have knowledge they really didn’t…
    As if the experts and government officials were drunk with their new found powers…
    I know I’m not an epidemiologist or virologist and was just being reckless in thinking the past was a good guide to the future…I mean Dr. St. Fau(x)ci said otherwise…and he’s the expert! The expert in the bureaucracy for 40 years. The expert who still hasn’t cured AIDS. The expert who did nothing to speed up the vaccine approval process. The expert who outsourced Corona virus “gain of function” research to some facility in China (it was somewhere near a “wet market”) when it was illegal on shore of the US…
    I KNEW he was a hack very early – in the daily press conferences, OrangeManBad said he was very hopeful about the HCQ findings (I had been studying this also and recommending to co-workers to ask for it early if they had signs). The good Dr. St. immediately pooh-poohed the findings as “anecdotal” and not valid unless as a result of a clinical double blind study. THEN, within 30 seconds he said he had “no doubt” masks and social distancing were working. Sorry, my lying hack BS meter went off then and there… It’s about the only good thing from getting old…

    Also, what are the ethics behind a clinical double blind study? In a way the expert can be choosing who lives and who dies. I think they may enjoy that power. It would be nice if we had a free press that treated all people with power like they treated Donald Trump. Actually, that’s too much – some manners and professionalism would be nice. But, as the old saying goes – if your mother says she loves you, check it out.

  5. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Oh the science! So, California and Florida have ended up at about the same place with regard to Coronavirus statistics despite vastly different approaches to lockdowns and other government policies? And what’s the answer from “the science”? The answer is “it’s complicated”. Wow. Really? That’s reassuring. A year after the onset the best “the science” can say about very similar results from very different lockdown approaches is that it’s complicated? Isn’t that synonymous with saying “we don’t know why and we never really did know what was going on”?

    https://www.healthline.com/health-news/why-do-california-and-florida-have-similar-covid-19-case-rates-the-answer-is-complicated

    If “the science” can’t tell why lockdowns sometimes seemed to work while other times they didn’t work …. is there really much “science” at all? Sounds like some people with degrees in science speculating about what actions to take without really knowing. Guess what? They still don’t know. These lockdowns aren’t based on “science” they are based on hubris and arrogance from a scientific community that might as well be practicing witchcraft.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Yep. When science can’t explain it to our satisfaction, we just dump the science and act like a herd of critters..and yep, we’ll die like a pandemic running through a herd, . good strategy… seems to be popular too!

      Odd combination of faith in God and… whatever…

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        When “science” isn’t really “science” then informed citizens should realize that and refuse to be bullied by people using the appeal to authority fallacy. Are you still wiping down the deliveries from Amazon with rubbing alcohol and then quarantining those packages for four days before opening them? The Commonwealth of Virginia paid good money to educate me from K through college. Presumably, that education was intended to help make me an informed citizen who can distinguish between pseudo-science BS and real science. Wearing a mask for the 15 feet I walk from the entrance of a restaurant to my table and then taking off that mask is idiotic Larry. So is a curfew between midnight and 5am. So is a ban on drinking alcohol after 10pm. You want to be a sheep? Great – Ralph “the Good Shepard” Northam will be happy to lead you off any cliff he finds convenient. Me? I’ll wear my mask in confined public places like airports and airplanes because the mask provides some protection to others if I cough or sneeze. But I won’t be bound by a curfew imposed by our ass clown of a governor in the name of “science”.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Science is REAL but in this day and time, one DOES have to WANT to know it.

          Science is NOT definitive right now on the virus – it’s still trying to understand but to leave it and just put your faith in “smart folks” and your own biases can be worse.

          It is not “opinion” when you get COVID or die from it. How you got it is still the stuff of science not just whatever you wish to believe.

          1. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Still trying to understand?

            The Medical evidence that COVID-19 wasn’t a fomite was released in July to the public.

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7333993/

            That means the medical community and “science” knew that the contraction of COVID-19 via surface was minimal even regardless of the surface in May. Yet, Dr. Fauci didn’t make this announcement during his speaking tour until October.

            “It is not “opinion” when you get COVID or die from it. How you got it is still the stuff of science not just whatever you wish to believe.”

            You got it through close contact with the nasal secretions of an individual who had it. It’s called a cough.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            true – so what is different about how the different variants spread? All by cough?

          3. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            COVID-19 SARS virus, severe acute respiratory virus.

            The variants are just mutations from the hosts, it has nothing to do with it’s transmission

          4. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            I thought they were saying some variants are more contagious, more transmissible, no?

            “Are the new variants more contagious?
            Jha says that evidence suggests the variants from the United Kingdom, South Africa, and Brazil are about 50% more contagious than the strain common in the United States. Scientists are still studying the transmissibility of the California variant, but they believe it is also more contagious. All the variants have mutations to the spike protein that the virus uses to gain entry to and infect human cells.”

            https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/covid-19-variants-are-spreading-rapidly-here-s-what-scientists-know-about-them-and-why-you-need

            this is where we totally rely on the science… and the experts in those fields.

          5. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Being more contagious or transmissible has nothing to do with it’s mode of transmission. The spike protein is how it infects its host cells and has nothing to do with being a fomite.

            What you just stated has nothing to do with method of transmission. For SARS-COV-2 to become a fomite would be an evolutionary jump (that the no other SARS type virus has made to date).

            That’s science.

          6. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Well, it’s NOT what I stated. It’s what I quoted and from science also.

            What you provided was YOUR opinion based on YOUR understanding and NOT based on actual scientific knowledge which produced the narrative I did quote from.

            You are not a scientist in this field, just another reader.

          7. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            What you stated has nothing to do with the mode of transmission. The mode being the means by which the virus is transferred from host to host. Perhaps you’ll take the NCBI’s word for it?

            “Key Summary Points
            Respiratory transmission is the dominant mode of transmission.

            Vertical transmission occurs rarely; transplacental transmission has been documented.

            Cats and ferrets can be infected and transmit to each other, but there are no reported cases to date of transmission to humans; minks transmit to each other and to humans.

            Direct contact and fomite transmission are presumed but are likely only an unusual mode of transmission.

            Although live virus has been isolated from saliva and stool and viral RNA has been isolated from semen and blood donations, there are no reported cases of SARS-CoV-2 transmission via fecal–oral, sexual, or bloodborne routes. To date, there is 1 cluster of possible fecal–respiratory transmission.”

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7505025/

            “What you provided was YOUR opinion based on YOUR understanding and NOT based on actual scientific knowledge which produced the narrative I did quote from”

            What you quoted was irrelevant and off topic and had nothing to do with the question you postulated originally.

            “You are not a scientist in this field, just another reader.”

            I’ve never claimed to be a “scientist” in this field, but I do hold a “scientific heavy” degree that required hours of Chemistry, Biology, Physics and Mathematics to acquire. Though that has very little to do with knowing the difference between virulence and transmission.

          8. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            “Heavy”degree or not, you are not a scientist in that field and you are quoting from scientific information and do did I yet the one I quote was “irrelevant and off topic” but yours is not?

            you’re a HOOT! Mr. Smart Guy you are!

          9. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            “LarrytheG a minute ago
            “Heavy”degree or not, you are not a scientist in that field and you are quoting from scientific information and do did I yet the one I quote was “irrelevant and off topic” but yours is not?

            you’re a HOOT! Mr. Smart Guy you are!”

            Your initial statement:

            “LarrytheG 14 hours ago
            true – so what is different about how the different variants spread? All by cough?”

            I quoted the mode of transmission which was the crux of your statement. You quoted an article on the transmissibility of the virus, which has nothing to do with the mode of transmission.

            Again, I’ve not claimed to be a “scientist” in the field of biology, but that doesn’t take away from correctly quoting a publication regarding the issue your brought up.

            Merely quoting a journal without understanding what you’re quoting or it’s lack of relevance to the initial question (you posed), is not relying on the “science”.

            Respiratory viruses are not fomites outside of the most unusual circumstances as indicated by my cited information.

            Again, don’t take my word for it, take the CDC’s.

            https://www.cdc.gov/disasters/disease/respiratoryic.html#:~:text=Many%20of%20the%20germs%20that,contact%20with%20a%20sick%20person.

            You know why they tell you to wash your hands? Most people sneeze and or cough into their hands and do not wash them regularly. You then have contact with that persons hand and directly wipe a mucous membrane (mm) giving the virus an ave. for attack.

          10. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            So do you know this from your personal work in this field of science or is it what you’re read?

            Am I listening to someone who knows first hand about this because of their actual work in this field or are you just providing stuff you have read (also)?

          11. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            “LarrytheG 8 minutes ago
            So do you know this from your personal work in this field of science or is it what you’re read?

            Am I listening to someone who knows first hand about this because of their actual work in this field or are you just providing stuff you have read (also)?”

            Why would I need to know this from “personal work”. I’m quoting you the authorities on the matter and they are all agreeing.

            “Am I listening to someone who knows first hand about this because of their actual work in this field or are you just providing stuff you have read (also)?” Did you really just make that statement?

          12. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            yes, we did.

          13. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Who is this “we” you speak of?

            If you’re not going to acknowledge authorities statements, publications and opinions on the matter of science. I think you should stop using the term “science”.

            I’ve not made any outlandish statements that aren’t rooted in well established scientific fact. The only person whom seems to take exception to this is yourself, and for whatever reason I’m unsure and not willing to venture a guess.

            Method of transmission is established fact, it’s not subject to opinion and I’ve stated none.

            Virulence is a separate topic all together.

          14. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            You quoted sources you chose and so did I. What makes your choices “established scientific fact” and the ones I chose, not or irrelevant ? Your opinion? 😉

            ” “Are the new variants more contagious?
            Jha says that evidence suggests the variants from the United Kingdom, South Africa, and Brazil are about 50% more contagious than the strain common in the United States. Scientists are still studying the transmissibility of the California variant, but they believe it is also more contagious. All the variants have mutations to the spike protein that the virus uses to gain entry to and infect human cells.”

            https://www.aamc.org/news-i

          15. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            I quoted the National Center for Biotechnology Information and the CDC. It’s not my opinion, you’re talking about a completely separate topic to what you started the conversation about. The fact of the matter is you’re messing up basic terms, that if you took a second to not argue you’d see your error.

            Again, you’re conflating method of transmission with virulence.

            Virulence
            : the relative capacity of a pathogen (such as a bacterium or virus) to overcome a host’s defenses and cause disease or damage : the degree of pathogenicity of a causative agent of disease

            Contagious
            : transmissible by direct or indirect contact with an infected person.

            Mode of Transmission is how it is passed from host to host.

            “Respiratory viruses are transmitted in multiple ways
            Infections with respiratory viruses are principally transmitted through three modes: contact, droplet, and airborne.

            Contact transmission is infection spread through direct contact with an infectious person (e.g., touching during a handshake) or with an article or surface that has become contaminated. The latter is sometimes referred to as “fomite transmission.”
            Droplet transmission is infection spread through exposure to virus-containing respiratory droplets (i.e., larger and smaller droplets and particles) exhaled by an infectious person. Transmission is most likely to occur when someone is close to the infectious person, generally within about 6 feet.
            Airborne transmission is infection spread through exposure to those virus-containing respiratory droplets comprised of smaller droplets and particles that can remain suspended in the air over long distances (usually greater than 6 feet) and time (typically hours). ”

            https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/scientific-brief-sars-cov-2.html#:~:text=Infections%20with%20respiratory%20viruses%20are,surface%20that%20has%20become%20contaminated.

            I am beyond flabbergasted that you can’t seem to understand the difference between transmission (method of spread) vs virulence (a viruses ability to overcome the hosts immune response) the latter being where the spike protein comes into play.

          16. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            re: ” a completely separate topic to what you started the conversation about.”

            I did not change the subject… right?

            something about “goal posts” ?

            You’re way too much a fan of yourself…sometimes!

            I know… it’s tough …. 😉

          17. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Yes, yes you did.

            No goalposts have been moved from my end.

            “You’re way too much a fan of yourself…sometimes!

            I know… it’s tough …. ;-)”

            Fan of myself? There is nothing contained in my comments remotely resembling self-congratulatory behavior. It’s straight facts and “science”, there however is a plethora of “non-relevant information” contained in yours.

            Learn the difference between virulence and mode of transmission. A virus can become more virulent as the day is long, but only an evolutional advancement would change its method of transmission. I’ve provided you with enough scientific data and definitions you should be able to avail yourself of that information.

            Furthermore, for snark to be effect you have a tenable grasp on the topic. Clearly that isn’t the case regarding this topic nor is it the case regarding logical fallacies.

          18. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Well,you’ve got some good points about ignorance, I’ll give you that…..

            🙂

            ” When the number of COVID-19 cases began to rise again in Manaus, Brazil, in December 2020, Nuno Faria was stunned. The virologist at Imperial College London and associate professor at the University of Oxford had just co-authored a paper in Science estimating that three-quarters of the city’s inhabitants had already been infected with SARS-CoV-2, the pandemic coronavirus—more than enough, it seemed, for herd immunity to develop. The virus should be done with Manaus. Yet hospitals were filling up again. “It was hard to reconcile these two things,” Faria says. He started to hunt for samples he could sequence to find out whether changes in the virus could explain the resurgence.”

          19. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Again, relevance to the topic at hand.

            What does any of that say about the mode of transmission of SARS-COV-2?

            What you keep providing is nothing more then an exercise in producing red herrings.

          20. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Well. Enjoy!

          21. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            What you stated has nothing to do with the mode of transmission. The mode being the means by which the virus is transferred from host to host. Perhaps you’ll take the NCBI’s word for it?

            “Key Summary Points
            Respiratory transmission is the dominant mode of transmission.

            Vertical transmission occurs rarely; transplacental transmission has been documented.

            Cats and ferrets can be infected and transmit to each other, but there are no reported cases to date of transmission to humans; minks transmit to each other and to humans.

            Direct contact and fomite transmission are presumed but are likely only an unusual mode of transmission.

            Although live virus has been isolated from saliva and stool and viral RNA has been isolated from semen and blood donations, there are no reported cases of SARS-CoV-2 transmission via fecal–oral, sexual, or bloodborne routes. To date, there is 1 cluster of possible fecal–respiratory transmission.”

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7505025/

            “What you provided was YOUR opinion based on YOUR understanding and NOT based on actual scientific knowledge which produced the narrative I did quote from”

            What you quoted was irrelevant and off topic and had nothing to do with the question you postulated originally.

            “You are not a scientist in this field, just another reader.”

            I’ve never claimed to be a “scientist” in this field, but I do hold a “scientific heavy” degree that required hours of Chemistry, Biology, Physics and Mathematics to acquire. Though that has very little to do with knowing the difference between virulence and transmission.

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      My company is pretty much uniform across the US. My observation is that there really was not a “vastly different” approach to Covid at the state level. Our on-site work in NY, CA, and FL never really shut down. All the states shut down large gatherings, etc. I think what you are contending may be the image cast in the media, but is in actuality not true.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        well.. it’s the way the willfully ignorant sometimes choose to view the world when they are conflicted themselves.

      2. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        There were pretty substantial differences between California and Florida at the governmental level. Your company’s approach and the edicts from government are two different things. In person dining rules are just one example of difference in COVID response. Now, Texas and Mississippi have lifted all the bans and at least Texas has ended the mask mandate. Biden calls that Neanderthal thinking so I guess our beloved president thinks there are differences in how COVID rules and regulations are being managed.

        1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          Certainly there is a difference between no controls and some controls but very little in practice between the states in controls that have been in place to date.

          1. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Sure there has.

            If you traveled from NY you could either work in the other state for 24 hours only or else you had a 2 week quarantine when you returned.

            PA required a quarantine or negative test from the preceding 3 days to enter.

            While their enforcement was always going to be tenable to state they didn’t have anything controls is false.

            Also note, you’re trying to compare corporate operations vs restrictions on people in general. They are two separate topics and merely mean you’re setting up the strawman you accused above.

          2. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Sure there has.

            If you traveled from NY you could either work in the other state for 24 hours only or else you had a 2 week quarantine when you returned.

            PA required a quarantine or negative test from the preceding 3 days to enter.

            While their enforcement was always going to be tenable to state they didn’t have anything controls is false.

            Also note, you’re trying to compare corporate operations vs restrictions on people in general. They are two separate topics and merely mean you’re setting up the strawman you accused above.

          3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            I did not say there was no difference but NY’s policy had pretty wide exemptions and given that many businesses were shut down and work from home was the norm, the true impact was to individuals was fairly negligible. My boss was caught up in it and pretty much said, “eh, I’ve got nowhere to go anyway”. PA’s was just a recommendation.

            The meaningful restrictions (large group gatherings, indoor dining, schools closing, etc) along with businesses shifting to work from home were really pretty ubiquitous and had pretty uniform impacts so that the differences you see in the death rate data is mostly influenced by population densities and demographics.

            I doubt that NY’s travel restriction had a meaningful impact on their numbers in the end but it is difficult to prove a negative and given where they started, was probably a pretty prudent decision.

          4. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Wide exemptions? If you were outside of NY state for more than 24 hours you were required to quarantine.

            ” the true impact was to individuals was fairly negligible.”

            Tell that to the millions of people who filed for unemployment. Tell that to the millions of small businesses who folded are and still folding up shop. Tell that to the millions of people who couldn’t mourn family (even if they were victims of the pandemic).

            “My boss was caught up in it and pretty much said, “eh, I’ve got nowhere to go anyway”. PA’s was just a recommendation.”

            Good for your boss and now that you’ve moved the goal posts there is no point to have a debate.

            “The meaningful restrictions (large group gatherings, indoor dining, schools closing, etc) along with businesses shifting to work from home were really pretty ubiquitous and had pretty uniform impacts so that the differences you see in the death rate data is mostly influenced by population densities and demographics.”

            It did not, but I find it amusing that you believe that to be true. I think it makes it abundantly clear you are tone deaf to what affects the pandemic had on people.

          5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Wow, talk about moving goalposts!! Who said the pandemic had no effect on people? We were discussing variables in state restrictions. I stand behind my characterizations. In effect, they were fairly uniform. If you want to argue with yourself in the corner, be my guest.

          6. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            “I did not say there was no difference but NY’s policy had pretty wide exemptions and given that many businesses were shut down and work from home was the norm, the true impact was to individuals was fairly negligible”

            You did.

            No you moved on from variable restrictions when you dismissed them and applied anecdotal evidence to arrive at that conclusion.

            “I stand behind my characterizations.”

            So you stand by being tone deaf and without a clue. I would be shocked, but given it’s you. I’m not.

          7. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            My anecdote was meant to exemplify my argument and was apt. You attack my use of an anecdote and launch a new salvo of ad hominem attacks… smh…

            I do note that while you like to argue compliance with parliamentary debate rules, in none of your arguments have you offered a shred of evidence that the heightened restrictions in select states actually impacted significant numbers in meaningful ways. On the other hand, my argument does actually match the data cited by the original author. The outside-the-norm restrictions you cite had very little impact of day-to-day lives over what was already uniformly or voluntarily in place. Demographic variations are likely the primary driver for the results observed.

          8. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            “My anecdote was meant to exemplify my argument and was apt”

            Anecdotal accounts do not exemplify anything, given the very meaning of anecdotal.

            I honestly don’t think you have a clue what “ad hom” attacks are, nor do half the posters on the site. It’s also gloriously ironic that you complain about “ad homs’ when you out and out did that very thing towards the author of the article.

            Well that would be an attempt to prove a negative and given that you’ve offered nothing yourself, I find that argument without merit. I also listed the ways in which people had been hindered by the restrictions, you just chose to ignore them because it didn’t fit your pre-determined narrative.

            You had no argument, you’re not engaging in bulverism.

            “The outside-the-norm restrictions you cite had very little impact of day-to-day lives over what was already uniformly or voluntarily in place. Demographic variations are likely the primary driver for the results observed.”

            Again, false. There are a plethora of SB’s that are no longer because of those restrictions. So much so that the Federal Government saw it fit to attempt to bail them out.

            “Demographic variations are likely the primary driver for the results observed.”

            With statements likes that I can assume that your employment is a function of the Federal Government and you live in NOVA and haven’t a clue how the real world works.

          9. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “Again, false. There are a plethora of SB’s that are no longer because of those restrictions.”

            Here are the stats on, for example, Connecticut which had a travel restriction in place similar to the NY restriction you cited earlier since July. Notice the lack of effect this order had on small businesses while notice the impact the onset of the pandemic had (due to voluntary public restriction of movement and the generally universal government shutdown restrictions). Again, the stricter restrictions had very little impact (in this case business shutdown stats actually improved in July when the governor made 14-day quarantines mandatory). So, ummm… not false. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/193b0984a56bf2d91659b8a3e7ac1a4bd65fba9560720147b859d1cdfc59f9f7.jpg

          10. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Again, you’ve moved the goalposts.

            Oh and it appears that graphs are hard for you, it proves what I stated.

          11. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            No goalposts have been moved by me. I have repeated the same thing over and over and this graph shows exactly what I said it does. Now go lick your wounds elsewhere.

          12. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Yes, yes you have. You went from stating that restrictions had no impact on peoples lives to it was significant enough in your opinion.

            No the graph shows what I’ve indicated, so either you can’t read a graph or don’t know what it says.

            It starts out at 0% and drops precipitously at April 1st and has risen to a whopping -37%. Meaning there was a contraction of small businesses, which is opposite of what you’ve tried to argue (my shocked face).

            The Figure’s heading even told you that you were wrong and yet you still posted it. “The number of Connecticut small businesses open in December of 2020 was 37% lower than in January 2020”

            What “wounds” would those be? The ones where you failed to prove your point.

          13. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            I said NY’s travel restrictions – the ones you specifically cited and that we are discussing – had no real impact. I never said restrictions as a whole had no real impact. You really need to learn to read and stop misrepresenting what I write – this is the second time you have done that and it is dishonest. This chart shows that the travel restrictions for the NE (NY’s was a part of a coordinated effort with neighboring states) had no real impact on small businesses. That restriction happened in July.

          14. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            I cited NY and PA (PA weren’t recommendations, they were actively shutting business down) as I know they’ve impacted my family and business. To which you decided to provided Connecticut data which was irrelevant and proved opposite of what you believed.

            Yes, yes you did and then you proceeded to move those goalposts when that didn’t bear out.

            “I did not say there was no difference but NY’s policy had pretty wide exemptions and given that many businesses were shut down and work from home was the norm, the true impact was to individuals was fairly negligible My boss was caught up in it and pretty much said, “eh, I’ve got nowhere to go anyway”. PA’s was just a recommendation.”

            I’m not misrepresenting anything, I’m using your words and statements against you. That’s how a debate works, you seem to have a problem doing that though.

            The chart was for Connecticut and it showed an immediate contraction of small businesses in April. Tow which it’s slightly recovered to -37% of what it was to start 2020.

            PS: Accusing someone of being dishonest when you can’t seem to figured where you data is from is an “ad hom”.

            “This chart shows that the travel restrictions for the NE (NY’s was a part of a coordinated effort with neighboring states) had no real impact on small businesses. That restriction happened in July.”

            You’ve got no facts or data that validate your statements, and you’ve so entrenched in that you can’t admit you’re wrong.

          15. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “Connecticut data which was irrelevant…”

            It was not irrelevant as CT combined its travel restrictions with NY and NJ into a ‘joint travel advisory”. See joint announcement June 24th. Here is a video of the announcement for you…

            https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1275816957732884482?s=20

            So it was one combined restriction. What happened in CT happened in NY.

            “PA weren’t recommendations”

            From the PA Media website – dated July 2, 2020:

            “If you have traveled, or plan to travel, to an area where there are high amounts of COVID-19 cases, it is recommended that you stay at home for 14 days upon return to Pennsylvania. If you travel to the following states, you will need to quarantine for 14 days upon return:

            “NY’s policy [the NY travel policy you cited in the preceding comment to me] …, the true impact was to individuals was fairly negligible…”

            Again, learn to read. I was specifically referring to NY’s travel policy which was enacted (with CT and NJ) on June 24th and (as shown on the graph I provided) had no impact on SB closures.

            “I’m not misrepresenting anything,”

            You are. You are trying to extend my statement that the NY travel restriction had no meaningfully impact to all of the restrictions and voluntary shutdown of the economy. I’ve not made that statement and you have now been told several times of your ‘error” and still maintain the mischaracterization. This is blatantly dishonest and me pointing that out is not an ad hominem.

            “You’ve got no facts or data that validate your statements”

            I am the only one who has supported his statements with actual data in this discussion so now you are projecting.

          16. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Connecticut’s data on small business contraction is irrelevant to small business contraction in NY.

            https://www.osc.state.ny.us/reports/osdc/retail-sector-new-york-city-recent-trends-and-impact-covid-19

            “So it was one combined restriction. What happened in CT happened in NY.”

            That is absolutely false, travel restrictions have nothing to do with those imposed by states internally and thus affecting small businesses.

            “From the PA Media website – dated July 2, 2020:
            “If you have traveled, or plan to travel, to an area where there are high amounts of COVID-19 cases, it is recommended that you stay at home for 14 days upon return to Pennsylvania. If you travel to the following states, you will need to quarantine for 14 days upon return:
            “NY’s policy [the NY travel policy you cited in the preceding comment to me] …, the true impact was to individuals was fairly negligible…”

            The point of showing me what I already knew was? Oh and I suppose you forgot that PA as well as NY instituted mandatory COVID-19 tests 3 days prior to entry as well. That restriction was just lifted last week in PA.

            I don’t think you know how to read a graph, clearly because what you provided showed opposite of what you seem to insist.

            No, I am not. Yes, in fact you did.

            Yes, yes it is an “ad hom” attack.

            “I am the only one who has supported his statements with actual data in this discussion so now you are projecting.”

            No you haven’t, your own citations have discounted your own statements. Oh so now we’ve moved on to projecting? Interesting, the sheer number of logical fallacies you’ve attempted to employ is baffling.

            At no point have you been able to prove your statements or claims.

          17. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “That is absolutely false, travel restrictions have nothing to do with those imposed by states internally and thus affecting small businesses.”

            We are ONLY discussing travel restrictions. Nothing else. You are the one who brought them up in the first place and since CT and NY imposed exactly the same travel restrictions at exactly the same time, the impacts would be the same – that is to say, none.

            “…showed opposite of what you seem to insist…”

            No it does not. I repeat, the graph shows that when the travel restriction YOU cited went into effect (June 24th), the SB closure rate actually went down not up.

            You are misrepresenting what I wrote and I have shown that to be a fact. That you continue to do so after being corrected shows you are dishonest. The reason that this is not an ad hominem attack is because the falsehood is central to your argument. If I said you were a convicted felon and you responded that this statement is demonstrably false and I am being dishonest, that would not be an ad hominem. You are saying that I stated something I have not stated. Me pointing out your dishonesty in this case is not an ad hominem. So sorry.

            “No you haven’t, your own citations have discounted your own statements.”

            Again, this is a false statement. The rate of business closings actually went down when the mandatory quarantine policies went into effect in June.

            Sorry but when you incorrectly claim that I have not provided support for my claim (which I have – see CT graph, for example) when it is you who have provided no data to support your position (which, I repeat, is that the NY mandatory travel quarantine restriction had dramatic impact on small businesses) then that is indeed projection. Deal with it.

          18. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            We aren’t just discussing travel restrictions that’s just a goalposts you moved in the beginning.

            You’ve provided nothing of substances to validate your claim and instead of admitting that error you’ve chosen logical fallacies.

            There is zero point to respond to your long drawn out thesis devoid of facts and more so just your own opinion on the matter.

            It’s evident that you’re understanding of logical fallacies is on par with your understanding of math, do better.

          19. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Here is even more evidence that the NY travel restrictions had very little impact relative to states that did not implement such restrictions. This map shows NY City (and Philadelphia, btw) small business closure rate to be on par or significantly lower than cities in those states that had no strict travel quarantine restrictions, namely Florida, Texas, even DC.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/69e16338b99cff3c5d90764fcdf4c834a29d5b269e06bf69f9975a3f87450eca.jpg

          20. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Further moving of goalposts by someone who didn’t bother to follow the link I have them.

          21. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Yes, yes you have. You went from stating that restrictions had no impact on peoples lives to it was significant enough in your opinion.

            No the graph shows what I’ve indicated, so either you can’t read a graph or don’t know what it says.

            It starts out at 0% and drops precipitously at April 1st and has risen to a whopping -37%. Meaning there was a contraction of small businesses, which is opposite of what you’ve tried to argue (my shocked face).

            The Figure’s heading even told you that you were wrong and yet you still posted it. “The number of Connecticut small businesses open in December of 2020 was 37% lower than in January 2020”

            What “wounds” would those be? The ones where you failed to prove your point.

        2. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          ” Abbott’s medical advisers were not all consulted before he lifted Texas mask mandate”

          guess they were all “liberals”, eh?

          Clearly, Science and Public Health are now considered “liberal” institutions, right?

  6. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “Hah. I was wrong. I overestimated how much Americans valued their civil liberties. I underestimated just how willingly they would surrender them.”

    No, you just incorrectly labeled these actions as “an attack on civil liberties” and the rest of the world ignored your lies. That is all that happened, no need to beat yourself up.

  7. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “If you find yourself hoping that Texas and Mississippi have a surge in COVID cases, you’re a horrible person.”

    Predicting and fearing are not hoping. Give the straw man arguments a break why don’t you.

  8. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Listening to Kerry sometimes, gives one the impression that a stop sign or traffic light or a line at McDonalds, in her way on a bad day is an “assault on her liberties”.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Little Miss Can’t-be-Wrong.

  9. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Opening up the schools for kids, bars for dads, and doors as Kerry approaches all have a good economic reasons; arguably some trade offs.

    What’s a good reason for not wearing a mask?

Leave a Reply