Rate of infection 50 times higher?

GAJ

Well-known member
Yeah, a lot of people don't. I dont think he is saying the disease is fake, but people may he able to decide to limit their own risk as he will do. I don't think it justifies the outlandish attacks for suggesting that.

That isn't speaking out of both sides of his mouth. Something can work without agreeing the government should do it. Unlawful searches could reduce crime. Doesn't mean we should all agree its a good idea.

IDK, the rules are being relaxed quite a bit in the greater Bay Area.

If you want to eat in a restaurant you can do that now in Napa...with conditions of course.

I could see a lot of complaints if the rules were still where they were 6 weeks ago for the greater Bay Area as a whole.
 

bojangle

FN # 40
Staff member
How is that any different than driving a car? Every time I got out on the road, I'm at risk from someone driving drunk or some idiot street racing. I just have to manage that risk to the best of my ability. You can never reduce your risk of injury or death from the actions of other people to zero. And the data and CDC guidance would indicate that this should be fairly easy for most people to mitigate if they are careful.

The public benefit argument falls flat at this point in my opinion. It's simply government telling people how to live their lives.

I used a motorcycle because it was an example that largely involves a person risk decision and is less likely to be a big risk to others. But I like your example of driving a car. Driving a car certainly carries risks that are not entirely in our control. And, as a result, the government created, and enforces, a large code book that controls how people live their lives while driving. Your examples of street racing and DUI are both illegal. There are many more vehicle codes than there are SIP laws.

Speaking of public safety, businesses must comply with numerous other codes in the name of public safety. We have a long precedent of law creation and law enforcement in the name of public safety. Your argument promoting laissez faire policy actually falls flat. California alone has 29 books full of codes that tell people how to live their lives. That's in additional to county laws, city laws, and federal laws.
 
Last edited:

Archimedes

Fire Watcher
I used a motorcycle because it was an example that largely involves a person risk decision and is less likely to be a big risk to others. But I like your example of driving a car. Driving a car certainly carries risks that are not entirely in our control. And, as a result, the government created, and enforces, a large code book that controls how people live their lives while driving. Your examples of street racing and DUI are both illegal. There are many more vehicle codes than there are SIP laws.

But none of those laws impinge upon my freedoms and none of them are ridiculously Draconian like locking us in our houses. Telling someone they can't get loaded and drive 125 down 101 is a lot different than telling them they have to stay in their house and can't even walk in the park or on the beach. Do you not get that?

Also, do you not get the fact that as an essential service provider you and all your cohorts are going to get crushed by the lack of tax revenues coming in? Does it not concern you that we are not going to have the tax revenues to fund minimal levels of basic services? Because the tax fallout at this point is almost beyond comprehension and if people can't read between the lines about what's going on in Sacramento and behind the scenes with Washington, they're in for a rude awakening. The crisis in Sacramento is way worse than the public realizes, and I actually think Gavin Newsom is doing his best to be transparent about it at this point because he realizes how dire it is.

Our city is totally broke already. We contacted the city this week to get them to take out a dying city owned Monterey Pine tree on our property that is in danger of taking out power lines and our house and it was a very sad conversation. They know they have to get it out soon but they're strapped. In two months we've gone from having this big fund for much needed street repairs in the city to that being all gone and the cost of removing a tree being a burden. Oh and they've furloughed or laid off a large number of city employees already.
 
Last edited:

bojangle

FN # 40
Staff member
But none of those laws impinge upon my freedoms and none of them are ridiculously Draconian like locking us in our houses. Telling someone they can't get loaded and drive 125 down 101 is a lot different than telling them they have to stay in their house and can't even walk in the park or on the beach. Do you not get that?

Also, do you not get the fact that as an essential service provider you and all your cohorts are going to get crushed by the lack of tax revenues coming in? Does it not concern you that we are not going to have the tax revenues to fund minimal levels of basic services? Because the tax fallout at this point is almost beyond comprehension and if people can't read between the lines about what's going on in Sacramento and behind the scenes with Washington, they're in for a rude awakening. The crisis in Sacramento is way worse than the public realizes, and I actually think Gavin Newsom is doing his best to be transparent about it at this point because he realizes how dire it is.

Our city is totally broke already. We contacted the city this week to get them to take out a dying city owned Monterey Pine tree on our property that is in danger of taking out power lines and our house and it was a very sad conversation. They know they have to get it out soon but they're strapped. In two months we've gone from having this big fund for much needed street repairs in the city to that being all gone and the cost of removing a tree being a burden. Oh and they've furloughed or laid off a large number of city employees already.

Of course I'm concerned about all of it. Not just tax revenue, but people without jobs too. You yourself said you believed in SIP, at least initially. SIP is already letting up. Just because it isn't on your timeline, doesn't mean it's wrong. And the economy would be screwed regardless of SIP.

I'm also not convinced the economy won't bounce back either. Monterey is a well funded tourist city. Well funded in normal times that is. A city like that will probably be hurt more than most due to the loss of tourism, and their bloated staff in place to deal with the tourism. Without tourism, Monterey City has WAY more staff than it needs to service a population of less than 30,000. Any layoffs or furloughs sucks, but I don't even think Monterey is representative of the average California city. And they will bounce back.
 

GAJ

Well-known member
But none of those laws impinge upon my freedoms and none of them are ridiculously Draconian like locking us in our houses. Telling someone they can't get loaded and drive 125 down 101 is a lot different than telling them they have to stay in their house and can't even walk in the park or on the beach. Do you not get that?

If that were true in the greater Bay Area rather than in just a few remaining areas of caution, you would have a point.

But that is not the case, things are indeed opening up much faster than previously communicated by Newsom.

Monterey County could seek SIP variance Tuesday
May 20 — Monterey County officials say they expect to ask the Board of Supervisors next Tuesday to declare that the county is meeting Stage 2 shelter-in-place goals, and to seek permission from state health officials to ease restrictions for businesses and others.

Gov. Gavin Newsom announced on Monday that criteria the state is seeking from counties is easing, and counties can apply for variances if it meets the new criteria.

https://voicesofmontereybay.org/2020/05/20/viral-facts-figures-closures-and-cancellations/
 

Archimedes

Fire Watcher
No, no. He has a family member who is high risk, so he won't be putting himself out there to possibly get infected. But it's ok for everyone else

I've been going out and about into the community almost every day. I'm just being very smart about it and managing my risk by distancing and not standing in place talking to anyone for an extended period of time. Not that hard to do, even in the office. Just stay separated and don't stand around next to each other shooting the shit.

Oh and my very high risk daughter is taking extra precautions, as she, and anyone else who is high risk, should. It's not rocket science, nor does it reduce the risk 100 percent.

And, please, spare me your ridiculous misinterpretations of my comments. Nowhere have I said anyone should be forced out into the community, nor am I telling anyone what's right for them. I've simply said they should be able to make the choice themselves, not be told what to do by others like you.

Back on topic, another look at the data shows how ridiculously stupid continuing to remain shut down is, when even the realistic worst case scenarios would still have the deaths from this disease lower than many other causes that we accept year in and year out and year in and year out. And many of the Covid 19 deaths would overlap with those other causes (diabetes, heart disease, respiratory disease), because many of the people most impacted by the coronavirus also fall into the leading cause of death risk categories. Far too much emotion and not enough rational thought going on at this point, and far too little transparency about the demographics of the virus, largely I'm guessing because it might indicate that our approach to it wasn't exactly the best. Rather than target the most vulnerable and protect them we simply took a sledgehammer approach and tried to protect everyone, even the least at risk, at the expense of real effectiveness. We played single coverage, when doubling might have made a lot more sense.
 

Archimedes

Fire Watcher

And guess why the Board of Supervisors suddenly got religion? Because, in the last week there has been an overwhelming outcry from the community, including a bunch of pressure directly on the supervisors to stop listening to Moreno and open the city back up. And a local lawyer was preparing a lawsuit against the county. It's been bubbling up for a while and people bombarded the board this week.
 

yumdumpster

Well-known member
I've been going out and about into the community almost every day. I'm just being very smart about it and managing my risk by distancing and not standing in place talking to anyone for an extended period of time. Not that hard to do, even in the office. Just stay separated and don't stand around next to each other shooting the shit.

Oh and my very high risk daughter is taking extra precautions, as she, and anyone else who is high risk, should. It's not rocket science, nor does it reduce the risk 100 percent.

And, please, spare me your ridiculous misinterpretations of my comments. Nowhere have I said anyone should be forced out into the community, nor am I telling anyone what's right for them. I've simply said they should be able to make the choice themselves, not be told what to do by others like you.

Back on topic, another look at the data shows how ridiculously stupid continuing to remain shut down is, when even the realistic worst case scenarios would still have the deaths from this disease lower than many other causes that we accept year in and year out and year in and year out. And many of the Covid 19 deaths would overlap with those other causes (diabetes, heart disease, respiratory disease), because many of the people most impacted by the coronavirus also fall into the leading cause of death risk categories. Far too much emotion and not enough rational thought going on at this point, and far too little transparency about the demographics of the virus, largely I'm guessing because it might indicate that our approach to it wasn't exactly the best. Rather than target the most vulnerable and protect them we simply took a sledgehammer approach and tried to protect everyone, even the least at risk, at the expense of real effectiveness. We played single coverage, when doubling might have made a lot more sense.

They did what they knew would work, there were so many unknowns when this shit broke out that we probably overreacted. And you know what? Im glad we did. It's so easy for you to look back from on high and pick apart the SIP strategy after the fact when you have 10 times the information available to you than the government did at the beginning on this crisis.

Hindsight is 2020.

Shoulda, woulda, coulda. Its done, it worked, move on, maybe say something positive for a change instead of just insulting everyone and being a general grump.
 

Climber

Well-known member
And guess why the Board of Supervisors suddenly got religion? Because, in the last week there has been an overwhelming outcry from the community, including a bunch of pressure directly on the supervisors to stop listening to Moreno and open the city back up. And a local lawyer was preparing a lawsuit against the county. It's been bubbling up for a while and people bombarded the board this week.
In the health guys defense, if the county suddenly spiked, he's the one that would take all of the heat, and this nation has gotten really bad at viciously attacking people based upon hindsight information.

He's probably just doing the CYA that is typical of government service, unless you know him personally and have proof that he's a control freak who gets off on power trips, it's probably a case of extra CYA on his part.
 

tuxumino

purrfect
And, please, spare me your ridiculous misinterpretations of my comments. Nowhere have I said anyone should be forced out into the community, nor am I telling anyone what's right for them. I've simply said they should be able to make the choice themselves, not be told what to do by others like you.

I think this would be true if everyone were reasonable, unfortunately there are a lot of unreasonable people, which leads our governments to enact laws and create policies aimed at the lowest denominator.
 

GAJ

Well-known member
Hindsight is 2020.

Indeed, on both sides.

Last night on PBS they addressed the "tens of thousands could have been saved if SIP started 2 weeks earlier."

Their guest pointed out that at that point the US had recorded all of 8 deaths and that trying to SIP at that point would simply not have been "logical" for most citizens to effectively comply.

And now you can see that some think we should have have ended sooner even though California overall is a month ahead re opening from what Newsom said just a month ago when it was "end of June."
 

Blankpage

alien
You'll always have the smarter than everyone else folks that know all the right moves after the fact vs the type who put in place pandemic response teams and write preparation guidelines. Like oil and water.
 

Archimedes

Fire Watcher
Of course I'm concerned about all of it. Not just tax revenue, but people without jobs too. You yourself said you believed in SIP, at least initially. SIP is already letting up. Just because it isn't on your timeline, doesn't mean it's wrong. And the economy would be screwed regardless of SIP.

I'm also not convinced the economy won't bounce back either. Monterey is a well funded tourist city. Well funded in normal times that is. A city like that will probably be hurt more than most due to the loss of tourism, and their bloated staff in place to deal with the tourism. Without tourism, Monterey City has WAY more staff than it needs to service a population of less than 30,000. Any layoffs or furloughs sucks, but I don't even think Monterey is representative of the average California city. And they will bounce back.

39 million unemployment claims so far. Estimate is 15 million jobs lost permanently. There isn't going to be a simple bounce back for the average American. There's going to be a massive recession. What's happening in the stock market has little to nothing to do with the reality of our economic situation or the struggle facing the average American.

Honestly, I really think people need to take some business, economics and accounting classes when this is all over, because I really think people have no clue whatsoever how our economy works and how our government is funded. The underlying economic situation is catastrophic and the fallout will be enormous. And every single week matters. Every additional week that we stay shut, thousands more jobs become permanently lost. So speed of reducing SIP has a very, very real impact on this country.

On a related note, Newsom announced that, barring an enormous federal bailout, which ain't coming, counties will begin laying off cops and firefighters on July 1. Make sense, lay off cops and firefighters right after we released all those prisoners, pushed a few million more people into poverty, and just before wildfire season. I mean what could go wrong?
 
Last edited:

Archimedes

Fire Watcher
You'll always have the smarter than everyone else folks that know all the right moves after the fact vs the type who put in place pandemic response teams and write preparation guidelines. Like oil and water.

Yes, because the 'time to relax SIP people' just started making their voices heard this week...:laughing
 

Archimedes

Fire Watcher
People are all ready doing that and have been since the SIP started.
Any of the medical, police or any other essential worker had to make a choice to continue to work. Sure for some it was financial over fear. Service over fear or.. they simply were not concerned.

I get the freedom angle to do as you wish, but I don't have a lot of confidence in the population that they would do things right.. and because that affects so many others I am choosing to listen to the Health orders.

I am just not on board with open the gates and let it happen as it comes.

But what about everyone else and why do you get to make that decision for them? Why do people have to sit at home and watch their businesses go under because some bureaucrat decides that SIP had to go on another month so they didn't look bad if someone dies? Seriously, when did we give state and local government the power to override the constitution and indefinitely confine people to their homes?
 

Climber

Well-known member
But what about everyone else and why do you get to make that decision for them? Why do people have to sit at home and watch their businesses go under because some bureaucrat decides that SIP had to go on another month so they didn't look bad if someone dies? Seriously, when did we give state and local government the power to override the constitution and indefinitely confine people to their homes?
The directive had to be from an authority and coordinated, I hope we can agree on that.

I think we also agree that SIP was necessary, though the duration seems to be the place where there is a differing of opinion.

I do think that some people will be overly cautious while others aren't cautious enough. Humans almost always distribute across a bell curve with their actions, that's just part of human nature.

Certainly some will have directed opening too soon, while others will be overly cautious. What is their driving factor? Probably not what some would paint them to be, but possibly not as honorable as they'd like others to be, either, or perhaps it was.

People will always apply their own perspective on the actions of others, and if they feel they've been negatively impacted, those perspectives could get very negative. Again, human nature.
 

budman

General Menace
Staff member
But what about everyone else and why do you get to make that decision for them? Why do people have to sit at home and watch their businesses go under because some bureaucrat decides that SIP had to go on another month so they didn't look bad if someone dies? Seriously, when did we give state and local government the power to override the constitution and indefinitely confine people to their homes?

I am not making a decision for anyone but me. :laughing
 

GAJ

Well-known member
People will always apply their own perspective on the actions of others, and if they feel they've been negatively impacted, those perspectives could get very negative. Again, human nature.

I'm not arguing it but some might argue Newsom is being TOO aggressive in opening up again.


California recorded 132 new coronavirus-related fatalities Tuesday — the most in a single day since the pandemic began — as counties across the state continue cementing plans to reopen their economies.

The highest number of deaths previously reported in a single day statewide was 117 in late April. Tuesday’s rise, which comes on a day when data from the previous weekend is typically released, pushed the state’s death toll past 3,400. The number of confirmed cases statewide has climbed to 83,864, according to data compiled by The Times.

While the death count continues to rise, other metrics show significant progress, enough that even some of the most cautious local health officials have agreed to begin slowly reopening businesses and public spaces.

The number of newly identified coronavirus cases across California declined from the previous week, and hospitalizations have dropped more than 15% from a peak six weeks ago, according to a Times analysis.

https://www.latimes.com/california/...ifornia-as-counties-push-ahead-with-reopening
 

Climber

Well-known member
I'm not arguing it but some might argue Newsom is being TOO aggressive in opening up again.

https://www.latimes.com/california/...ifornia-as-counties-push-ahead-with-reopening
You're probably correct, though like every politician he is walking a tightrope between too soon and pressures to open sooner.

I don't think he's doing a terrible job, but probably not the best job either, but a month from now we'll know better.

Remember, also, he's facing the realities of state budget with California's huge economy mostly shut down and the many bills that keep stacking up. Most people in this state are ignoring that reality, the governor can't.
 
Last edited:
Top