Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Janet Yellen supposedly Biden's pick for Treasury Secretary

13

Comments

  • edited December 2020

    >> What sacrifices do we need to make to save that half a degree?

    You write as though you keep up, but it is clear you do not, not really. There is a lot of work out there, hardcore practical effective proposals, a lot of them by your mocked academics, covering what is entailed to effect such a huge course alteration as a half a degree.

    You must have read, while worrying about working coalminers (of whom there are very very few), and about John Kerry's lifestyle indicating what, hypocrisy? seriously? Kerry?, about the temperature point (which is close, meaning not that far off) at which human life becomes nearly impossible.

    >> How about moving north?

    Oh, go for it.

    Eventually, and not so far off either, those forests will burn every summer too.

    Or ... get hep to renewables and feasible policy:
    https://blogs.imf.org/2020/10/07/finding-the-right-policy-mix-to-safeguard-our-climate/

    I am fascinated that someone literate and thoughtful-sounding falls back on the tiredest of Fox editorials:

    \\\ ... causing substantial damage to the environment and people in other respects? This is the real and fair debate among knowledgeable people,

    Yes, there absolutely is real discussion of trades. Moneys for retraining. Serious moneys. Disaster relief. Can you cite the debates you think are most informed or fairminded or interesting or promising?

    \\\ and to deny it makes you the ignorant one.

    You probably had best not go there, honestly, and not just with LB.

    \\\ Some honest and good people do care about an entire industry and its workers being told to shut down. If your brother, son, daughter or best friend made their living as a coal minor or working an oil rig I think you would see this point.

    Again, best not to personalize or go to anecdote.

    There is no helping coalminers or rig workers no matter what anyone does or what policies are adopted. Everybody but you and the most extreme of rightwingers know that --- National Review, the industries themselves, any of the candidates except for the departing pantsloaded infant. 'See this point'? What point would that be? Have you followed (e.g.) coal trends and the data over the last decades ?

    These are old and tired arguments, from the 1970s, as though you are 95yo and just waking up and never read the number-crunching.

    \\\ I doubt you know any of those types.

    oh, here we go. You probably also do not want to turn this into some blue-collar cred thing either, not if you want to present as thoughtful. It's not like a Clifford Odets play from 1934.


    You are one angry man. Retraining? You go for that. Your long drone did not identify a single thing to save that half a degree nor explain how deals drawn up by elite hypocrites in Europe are going to prevent those in the rapidly expanding developing world from spewing smoke and driving in their gas-powered vehicles for years to come, and it's a good thing too or else they might burn up on the spot according to you. It's cool and all to have new age green ideas, even for a probable old white guy like you, but you still haven't explained what should be done that's preferable to what is already being done, like better emission controls, clean coal, etc. I simply don't agree that extreme measures like banning fracking and giving up American energy independence will benefit our country and, despite hopes and dreams, will not even save that half a degree.
  • How many people did the U.S. coal mining industry employ in 2019? 53,000. https://statista.com/statistics/215790/coal-mining-employment-in-the-us/
    How many people are employed in the retail service sector: 9.8 million.
    https://census.gov/library/stories/2020/09/profile-of-the-retail-workforce.html
    Yet guys like wxman123 and our soon to be ex-president wax poetic about the poor coal miners while millions in retail are struggling to stay afloat because of Amazon and covid. You know what the difference is? This is who the retail sector employs--not the Fox News demographic--according to the Census bureau:

    Retail workers are younger. Over half of all retail workers were ages 16 to 34.
    Women were more likely to work in retail jobs. About 56.5% of retail workers were women, compared with 43.5% who were men.
    Blacks and Hispanics were overrepresented in retail work. Blacks comprised 12.5% of the retail workforce compared to 11.4% of the total workforce; Hispanics were 18.7% and 17.5%, respectively.
    But oh, the poor coal miners! The symbolism is perfect to stoke that tribalistic white nationalist animosity because 91% of coal miners are white males, and only 0.9% are black: https://bls.gov/cps/cpsaat18.htm They are being replaced by technology regardless whether we have a green new deal or not. Meanwhile, the retail workforce is being decimated by Covid: https://cnbc.com/2020/07/22/coronavirus-retail-workforce-faces-permanent-decline.html

    We finally agree on something. Covid, and, more accurately stated, the overblown and ineffective response, is decimating not only the retail industry, but also travel, food and beverage, personal care, etc. As is my point on climate, the cure cannot be worse than the disease. That clearly has been the case with Covid. As for the coal minor, sure, a comparatively small industry, but one that is directly affected by the new green movement. Every life matters, right? That said, if I bought your premise that shutting down American energy independence is needed to save the planet, I can get on board with that. But it probably isn't and won't even if it is.
  • edited December 2020
    @wxman123
    As for the coal minor, sure, a comparatively small industry, but one that is directly affected by the new green movement. Every life matters, right?
    Not apparently the thousands--soon to be millions--already displaced as climate refugees from their homes or apparently the sea otter to you. And of course there's the sheer absurdity of your assuming that reducing fossil fuel dependence and carbon emissions only destroys jobs and won't create any simultaneously. Reducing the world's carbon footprint will be an immense task that will create more jobs certainly than it destroys in the already moribund coal industry. But as I said previously and I maintain, none of this really matters to you. You know the science is true and the impact will be severe but just don't care.

    More "meaningless" science-y stuff: https://scientificamerican.com/article/would-a-green-new-deal-add-or-kill-jobs1/
    We estimate that the more conservative $25 carbon tax would boost U.S. employment by 1.4 million jobs each year between 2020 and 2030, which is nearly a 1 percent increase above the reference–case forecast of 160 million jobs in 2030. As the economy expands and the tax increases, job growth from the GND [i.e., Green New Deal] would accelerate, creating, on average, 3.4 million new jobs each year between 2040 and 2050—a nearly 2 percent increase above the 182 million jobs forecast for the U.S. in 2050. Overall, it is estimated that 72 million job years would be created over the three decades with a $25 carbon tax. (Note that if one job continues after one year for another 12 months, it represents two job years.)

    With the more aggressive $60 carbon tax, U.S. employment would still exceed the reference-case forecast, but the increase would be less than that of the $25 tax. The higher tax causes much larger supply-side job losses, but they are still smaller than the gains in energy-efficiency jobs motivated by higher energy prices. Overall, 35 million job years would be created between 2020 and 2050, with net job increases in almost all regions.

    According to the latest data, in 2018 about 9.2 million Americans (5.7 percent of the U.S. workforce of roughly 162 million at the time) were employed in an energy industry. Nearly half of these jobs (about 4.3 million) made up the traditional supply-oriented categories: fuels, including petroleum, natural gas, coal and woody biomass (1.1 million); electric power generation (900,000); and transmission, distribution and storage (2.3 million). The motor-vehicle-related industries employed 2.5 million, and energy efficiency employed 2.4 million.

    The GND would cause traditional supply-oriented jobs to decrease, but energy-efficiency jobs would more than compensate for the losses. New jobs from energy-efficiency investments would be significant, totaling 1.8 million in 2030 and 4.2 million in 2050. These estimates reflect the labor-intensity of jobs in construction, which account for more than half of the energy-efficiency workforce in 2018. Other large gains would be associated with heating, ventilation, air-conditioning and refrigeration systems—the largest share of energy-efficiency investments in the residential and commercial sectors. In industry, the greatest investments estimated would be in energy and environmental management and smart controls, followed by industrial-machinery manufacturing such as that of high-efficiency motors and variable-speed drives. The result would be job growth across all nine Census divisions of the U.S., in all three decades with a $25 carbon tax. The $60 tax would boost job growth in the U.S. overall and across a majority of its nine Census divisions and three decades.

  • >> Covid, and, more accurately stated, the overblown and ineffective response ...
    >> ... the cure cannot be worse than the disease. That clearly has been the case with Covid.

    Say, since you are articulate and appear to give things thought, if you were in charge of both covid policy and energy policy, what would you advise? No changes?

    Serious question. From angry droning old white guy.

    >> still haven't explained what should be done that's preferable to what is already being done

    I missed the carbon tax and emissions and temperature mandates and the new federal land and forest management policies and and even the wee things like national seaweed research ...
    This is a high-level view of the state of play:
    https://www.brookings.edu/2019/03/22/where-does-u-s-climate-policy-stand-in-2019/

    Here is some tired old dated progtard reading, surely superseded (and strengthened by now):

    https://www.nrdc.org/stories/how-you-can-stop-global-warming
    https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/what-can-we-do-slow-or-stop-global-warming
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/whats-in-a-half-a-degree-2-very-different-future-climates/
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/limiting-warming-to-1-5-celsius-will-require-drastic-action-ipcc-says/

    and mostly this is not out of the UN or the Paris Accords we pulled out of.
  • "How about moving north? there's a lot of vacant land in the north country."

    We've got to give wxman123 a lot of credit on that one- it's probably the easiest and simplest way to handle the whole thing that we've yet heard.

    After getting the agreement of every nation on the face of the earth, we just start at the equator and move each and every national border line and all interior borders of all political jurisdictions, and finally each and every property line 100 miles north or south, depending upon the hemisphere. As the planet continues to warm, we simply move everything again, as much as needed.

    It's going to be a little tough on island nations, but sometimes you have to take the bad with the good.

    That's going to leave quite a bit of unusable territory near the equator, but we can designate that area as the international dumping ground for plastic waste and other non-recyclable crap.

    I'm certain that other benefits will become obvious once we get started on this fine program.


  • >> Covid, and, more accurately stated, the overblown and ineffective response ...
    >> ... the cure cannot be worse than the disease. That clearly has been the case with Covid.

    Say, since you are articulate and appear to give things thought, if you were in charge of both covid policy and energy policy, what would you advise? No changes?

    Serious question. From angry droning old white guy.

    >> still haven't explained what should be done that's preferable to what is already being done

    I missed the carbon tax and emissions and temperature mandates and the new federal land and forest management policies and and even the wee things like national seaweed research ...
    This is a high-level view of the state of play:
    https://www.brookings.edu/2019/03/22/where-does-u-s-climate-policy-stand-in-2019/

    Here is some tired old dated progtard reading, surely superseded (and strengthened by now):

    https://www.nrdc.org/stories/how-you-can-stop-global-warming
    https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/what-can-we-do-slow-or-stop-global-warming
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/whats-in-a-half-a-degree-2-very-different-future-climates/
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/limiting-warming-to-1-5-celsius-will-require-drastic-action-ipcc-says/

    and mostly this is not out of the UN or the Paris Accords we pulled out of.


    I don't have any great ideas on how we could have dealt with Covid any better. Most of the strategies tried throughout the world ended up failing sans New Zealand (for the most part) clearly most of things we tried in the USA failed. Mother nature will usually have her way. You can't lock down people forever and masks really are only marginally effective (it seems) but I wear a mask, can't hurt (IMO). On the other hand, the shutdowns cost millions of jobs, depression, even suicide. How many lives were saved by shutting hair salons and gyms? I don't know but I doubt very many in the grand scheme. Operation warp speed seems brilliant but time will tell, not clear about the long term consequences of the vaccine (there is a phenomenon where it may even hurt in the real long term, like with the Dengue vaccine). I probably would have gone with the Florida approach. The covid there is as bad as mostly everywhere else but at least business owners are surviving, there is freedom of choice, and no outrageous hypocrisy from the leadership. As for energy, I'm good with common sense approaches, limiting emissions where we can, employing reasonable alternative energy where plausible. I'm not for plowing down vast stretches of land to install windmills nor agreeing to treaties where we do our part but most of the rest of the world goes their merry way.
  • I believe it was reported last Covid case in Taiwan was in April ! They were doing something right ! If one didn't stay quarantined & was caught , fine was $33k ?
    Stay Safe, Derf
  • Derf said:

    I believe it was reported last Covid case in Taiwan was in April ! They were doing something right ! If one didn't stay quarantined & was caught , fine was $33k ? Stay Safe, Derf

    It helps if you start with an island with a small number of cases to begin with.
  • Jamaica did awesome too....until they realized people needed to eat and opened the door to tourism to us ugly Americans. They did their best, covid tests, temp checks, etc. Still not so good.
  • edited December 2020
    @wxman123 - who said "I don't have any great ideas on how we could have dealt with Covid any better." So you think that denying that it even existed, calling it names (China virus), calling it a hoax and stating that it would just magically disappear was the way to go huh? How has that worked out so far?

    You also said "How many lives were saved by shutting hair salons and gyms?" How would you even quantify this since the intent was to stop the spread of the virus between folks who don't frequently share their life's activities outside these venues. The same goes for wearing of the masks. I have lost friends in FL because of the moronic way the governor and money grubbing crowd in that state have chosen to deal with Covid. Unlike you I consider their choices as idiocy.

    Edited Sunday morning to add:

    Trump’s Operation Warp Speed promised a flood of covid vaccines. Instead, states are expecting a trickle.

    So maybe just a 10th as brilliant.
  • wxman123 said:



    \\\ how we could have dealt with Covid any better. Most of the strategies tried throughout the world ended up failing sans New Zealand (for the most part) clearly most of things we tried in the USA failed. Mother nature will usually have her way. You can't lock down people forever and masks really are only marginally effective (it seems)
    ... On the other hand, the shutdowns cost millions of jobs, depression, even suicide. How many lives were saved by shutting hair salons and gyms? I don't know but I doubt very many in the grand scheme. Operation warp speed seems brilliant but time will tell, .... I probably would have gone with the Florida approach. The covid there is as bad as mostly everywhere else but at least business owners are surviving, there is freedom of choice, and no outrageous hypocrisy from the leadership. ...

    Wrongness and wrongheadedness aside, I do not have the words to express how discouraging and jolting it is to read this, from someone who seems to read and keep up a little bit and considers others' responses.

    But it is an answer to the question I posed to you, so thanks for that.
  • You guys are actually expecting a rational response from someone whose answer to climate change is "How about moving north? there's a lot of vacant land in the north country."?
  • Leave the cultist X and back to the topic. What do you think will happen if JY is not confirmed by Republican Senate (I am assuming they will win a seat in GA - all election people are being threatened by the cultists and some will buckle, DT is pressuring the officials with the OPEN threat - democracy is dead - sad state of affair)?
  • edited December 2020
    She will be confirmed no matter what happens in Georgia, which some are optimistic about (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/in-georgia-debate-loeffler-refuses-to-acknowledge-trump-lost-election/ar-BB1bGzrs)

    The rest of any blunting of the last destructive 4y, who knows?

    This is worth keeping in mind, for mental health.

    (JRubin WaPo) --- overwhelming:
    Biden not only received a majority of the popular vote, but also cleared 51 percent — the largest vote percentage obtained against an incumbent president since 1932 and a bigger percentage of the popular vote than any Republican president since George H.W. Bush in 1988, when Bush was essentially running for a third Ronald Reagan term. In the process, Biden amassed the largest total number of ballots in U.S. history. He pummeled Trump by more than 7 million votes (and exceeded Barack Obama’s 2008 vote total by more than 11 million). That margin is bigger than Massachusetts’s entire population; in fact, only 14 states have a population of more than 7 million. Biden’s popular vote margin by percentage (4.4 percent) far surpasses Obama’s 2012 victory over Mitt Romney.
  • Mark said:

    @wxman123 - who said "I don't have any great ideas on how we could have dealt with Covid any better." So you think that denying that it even existed, calling it names (China virus), calling it a hoax and stating that it would just magically disappear was the way to go huh? How has that worked out so far?

    You also said "How many lives were saved by shutting hair salons and gyms?" How would you even quantify this since the intent was to stop the spread of the virus between folks who don't frequently share their life's activities outside these venues. The same goes for wearing of the masks. I have lost friends in FL because of the moronic way the governor and money grubbing crowd in that state have chosen to deal with Covid. Unlike you I consider their choices as idiocy.

    Edited Sunday morning to add:

    Trump’s Operation Warp Speed promised a flood of covid vaccines. Instead, states are expecting a trickle.

    So maybe just a 10th as brilliant.


    So what approach worked well (outside of a few islands)? Gun to your head: had Hilary or Biden been in office do you think we'd fall more on the New Zealand side of the ledger or closer to the UK, France, Spain? Same question on the vaccine, do you think Hilary or Biden would have done better? Was Cuomo genius as DeSantis was "moronic"? Now, after one of the fastest vaccines in history is developed the liberal media is criticizing the speed with which it will get distributed, and before it even happens? Sorry you lost friends, but in Florida that was very likely a result of choices THEY made, unlike Cuomo who gave nursing home residents none.
  • "Sorry you lost friends, but in Florida that was very likely a result of choices THEY made, unlike Cuomo who gave nursing home residents none."

    Yes, they decided to become doctors and nurses. So stupid.
  • beebee
    edited December 2020
    Mark said:

    "Sorry you lost friends, but in Florida that was very likely a result of choices THEY made, unlike Cuomo who gave nursing home residents none."

    Yes, they decided to become doctors and nurses. So stupid.

    70% of COVID related deaths in CT occurred in nursing homes...Our elderly parents...and workers (more often low wage nursing home workers).

    https://ctpost.com/news/coronavirus/article/Data-70-of-CT-coronavirus-linked-deaths-have-15271386.php

    On Cuomo's executive orders:
    Cuomo, who received praise for his early and high-profile response to the pandemic, has come under fire from state Senate Republicans, industry advocates and others for his administration’s handling of the outbreak at nursing homes and adult care facilities.

    “Obviously the way it rolled out here was pretty disastrous for people — for residents and their families. … This hit us, perhaps, harder than it should have,” Richard J. Mollot, executive director of the Long Term Care Community Coalition, told POLITICO. “Some of this was avoidable, preventable — some of it still is if we take the appropriate actions.”
    https://politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2020/05/06/cuomo-under-fire-for-response-to-covid-19-at-nursing-homes-1282821
  • Mark said:

    "Sorry you lost friends, but in Florida that was very likely a result of choices THEY made, unlike Cuomo who gave nursing home residents none."

    Yes, they decided to become doctors and nurses. So stupid.

    It was a noble choice, and sorry they were in harm's way. That said, I do not understand why you blame the "moronic...governor and money grubbing crowd in that state" for their deaths. Are you saying there are doctors working under more enlightened leadership that have somehow avoided working with covid patients, did so with more precautions, PPE? It seems to me there are thousands of cases daily, everywhere. I'm not sure the covid problem is rooted in politics even if things may have been handled better, or if stupid things Trump said were not said. Piling on is just an expression of your political views, IMO.

  • “Richard J. Mollot, executive director of the Long Term Care Community Coalition, told POLITICO. 'Some of this was avoidable, preventable ...'"
    Richard Mollot [said] “There was little reason for nursing homes to think they should only take in patients if they have the ability to do so safely because those rules are not generally enforced on a regular basis. [Emphasis added.]”
    ...
    How much of the blame for the deaths of thousands of people in nursing homes from COVID-19 can be attributed to Cuomo’s March advisory?
    ...
    While public health experts quibbled with the [New York State Health Dept.] report’s self-serving claim that the governor’s policy wasn’t a factor in COVID-19 nursing home deaths, they nevertheless agreed with the report’s broader conclusion that nursing home staffers as well as visitors, before they were banned, were likely the main drivers of COVID-19 infection and death in nursing homes.

    “Based on the timeline of the policy and deaths in the city, it is very unlikely that policy contributed to thousands of deaths,” said Shivakoti [assistant professor of epidemiology at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University]. [Emphasis in original.]
    ...
    While the introduction of COVID-19 positive patients into nursing homes no doubt had an effect on infection spread, Caputo’s statement suggests it was solely responsible. That’s not what the evidence shows.

    We rate this Mostly False.
    https://khn.org/news/is-cuomo-directive-to-blame-for-nursing-home-covid-deaths-as-us-official-claims/
    by Kaiser Health News and Politifact Healthcheck
  • msf said:

    “Richard J. Mollot, executive director of the Long Term Care Community Coalition, told POLITICO. 'Some of this was avoidable, preventable ...'"

    Richard Mollot [said] “There was little reason for nursing homes to think they should only take in patients if they have the ability to do so safely because those rules are not generally enforced on a regular basis. [Emphasis added.]”
    ...
    How much of the blame for the deaths of thousands of people in nursing homes from COVID-19 can be attributed to Cuomo’s March advisory?
    ...
    While public health experts quibbled with the [New York State Health Dept.] report’s self-serving claim that the governor’s policy wasn’t a factor in COVID-19 nursing home deaths, they nevertheless agreed with the report’s broader conclusion that nursing home staffers as well as visitors, before they were banned, were likely the main drivers of COVID-19 infection and death in nursing homes.

    “Based on the timeline of the policy and deaths in the city, it is very unlikely that policy contributed to thousands of deaths,” said Shivakoti [assistant professor of epidemiology at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University]. [Emphasis in original.]
    ...
    While the introduction of COVID-19 positive patients into nursing homes no doubt had an effect on infection spread, Caputo’s statement suggests it was solely responsible. That’s not what the evidence shows.

    We rate this Mostly False.
    https://khn.org/news/is-cuomo-directive-to-blame-for-nursing-home-covid-deaths-as-us-official-claims/
    by Kaiser Health News and Politifact Healthcheck

    Another biased article, and so sadly so I'm surprised you (MSF) fell for it. If the thesis were accurate then there should be little difference in nursing home covid deaths between NY and states that did not follow the Cuomo doctrine, all of them would have allowed covid in before leadership knew better. Yet there is difference. In fact, the premise of the article is ludicrous.
  • What was "mostly false" was the claim that Cuomo was "solely responsible." I can agree on that point.
  • " If the thesis were accurate then there should be little difference in nursing home covid deaths between NY and states that did not follow the Cuomo doctrine, all of them would have allowed covid in before leadership knew better."

    There should have been little difference in nursing home covid deaths in NY and elsewhere because of course there was no difference in covid death rates outside of nursing homes in NY and other states at the time.

    Did you check out the extensive list of citations in the article? For example, the WSJ article cited says "Researchers who study long-term care facilities said the extent of coronavirus infections in the state’s nursing homes reflects the virus’s widespread presence in the community, particularly around New York City."

    Who'd've thunk it?

    Some of the deaths could have been avoided. But suggesting that all of the excess above that of other states could have been avoided stretches credulity.
  • >> stretches credulity

    talk about being diplomatic
  • Read: "130,000 – 210,000 AVOIDABLE COVID-19 DEATHS – AND COUNTING – IN THE U.S.”
    https://ncdp.columbia.edu/custom-content/uploads/2020/10/Avoidable-COVID-19-Deaths-US-NCDP.pdf
  • @wxman123 - I'm done arguing with you and from now on I'm just going to let you be wrong.

    Furthermore you said "Piling on is just an expression of your political views, IMO." Your opinion couldn't be further from the truth. What matters to me is the knowledge and the opinions of the scientific and medical experts in the field. I could care less about the politics as I have yet to meet a virus that is politically inclined. The difference between DeSantis and Cuomo is that DeSantis did everything that 45 and his political/money backers told him to do in managing this pandemic/virus while Cuomo did as the scientific and medical advisors suggested. Was some of it wrong? Possibly but that's how science works and this was a new virus.

    The same lunacy is now being played out in MN and the Dakota's where the Dakota governors bowed to 45 and now have some of the highest infection and death rates in the nation. Gov. Walz of MN who followed the advice of the science and medical experts is being skewered by those two governors and their MN republican allies while meanwhile those same two governors are sending their covid patients to MN for treatment because their hospitals are full.
  • +1 Mark wxman and fd1000 can argue among themselves while the rest of us will discuss various aspects of investing-oef etf individual stocks, etc !
  • Mark said:

    @wxman123 - I'm done arguing with you and from now on I'm just going to let you be wrong.

    Furthermore you said "Piling on is just an expression of your political views, IMO." Your opinion couldn't be further from the truth. What matters to me is the knowledge and the opinions of the scientific and medical experts in the field. I could care less about the politics as I have yet to meet a virus that is politically inclined. The difference between DeSantis and Cuomo is that DeSantis did everything that 45 and his political/money backers told him to do in managing this pandemic/virus while Cuomo did as the scientific and medical advisors suggested. Was some of it wrong? Possibly but that's how science works and this was a new virus.

    The same lunacy is now being played out in MN and the Dakota's where the Dakota governors bowed to 45 and now have some of the highest infection and death rates in the nation. Gov. Walz of MN who followed the advice of the science and medical experts is being skewered by those two governors and their MN republican allies while meanwhile those same two governors are sending their covid patients to MN for treatment because their hospitals are full.


    As long as the experts agree with you. You blamed the deaths of your alleged Florida-based healthcare friends directly on a "moronic" governor but conveniently ignore that Gavin Newsome (another big science guy, right) has presided over the state with the worst covid record amongst healthcare workers (and pretty dreadful overall). Did he kill his state's healthcare workers too? If you don't think you wear your politics on your sleeve, you are very badly mistaken. I'd bet my life you hate Trump and voted for Biden.
    You have found fault with everything Trump and the R's have done (even operation warp speed) and defended Cuomo and the D's (even his criminal nursing home directive). I can find "smart guy" fact checkers and so-called researchers who will refute all of your "smart guys" with their version of "facts." So what? When I asked YOU to tell me a covid plan that's been successful all I heard was crickets. It is YOU who has used covid to make a political point no matter how artfully written. Fine if you don't respond, I could care less.
  • @Wxman123
    but conveniently ignore that Gavin Newsome (another big science guy, right) has presided over the state with the worst covid record amongst healthcare workers (and pretty dreadful overall).
    False, on both counts: First, there isn't good data on healthcare workers:
    https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#health-care-personnel
    Data were collected from 10,856,748 people, but healthcare personnel status was only available for 2,154,525 (19.85%) people.
    For the 254,581 cases of COVID-19 among healthcare personnel, death status was only available for 189,845 (74.57%).
    But more important, California's overall infection rate--3,391 per 100,000 people--and death rate--50 per 100,000 people--are among the best in the nation: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#cases_deathsper100k
    Florida's infection rate is 4,886 per 100,000 people and its death rate is 90 per 100,000 people.
Sign In or Register to comment.