The direct implications of CV aside, this is an astonishing study of human sociology and psychology,

[anon_w4pknohc0ndth]

Yes.

And I don't think whether they are good at their job has any bearing on their knowledge of the current crisis.

So if BMW tells me that they need me at work do you suggest that i tell them to kiss my ass?

 

[TanyardDawg520]

Pegging it on Low IQ is far too simplistic as you have come to realize. Holding polar ideas and recognizing the possibility of a different outcome than what the mass is telling you isn't a lack of IQ. It is very obvious this thing is spreading and its obvious for some it is very bad but it also obvious there have been far too few tests including on the asymptomatic. We are making decisions on very incomplete and faulty data at this point.

The people holding polar ideas still need to expect the worst and hope for the best though, IMO. We absolutely need to be overreacting to this thing.

 

[jwhit2010]

Well, so many false narratives have exploded in the age of social media, that many people, a ton on here, couldn't be convinced that change was necessary. Heck, the spring breakers defying beach shutdowns and the tons who mingled the last 3 days for St. Paddy's day are great examples. Being responsible is hard and blaming the internets is easy.

Yep. There should be a way to have to log gps coordinates several times a day to be eligible for for the stimulus money

 

[Billy Zane]

So if BMW tells me that they need me at work do you suggest that i tell them to kiss my ass?

I don't. If you're in a situation where you can be fairly distanced from others and can keep things sanitary and all that, then it's necessary to keep the world going. Now, and I haven't been keeping up w/ your posts, if it's gym, work, out for lunch, bar after work, run to the supermarket, repeat, then that's a different issue altogether.

I guess my question for you in a more general sense is this:

If, normally, there are 40 people at my gym when I go, and now there are 5 because the majority of folks are choosing to avoid what is probably the single easiest place to transmit or contract a virus, is it really appropriate for me to take advantage while others are "sacrificing" (loosely using that word for lack of a better one)? Because, sure, if there are only 5 people there, it's incredibly unlikely that anything will happen, at least at this point in time.

 

[PDX_Dawg]

So if BMW tells me that they need me at work do you suggest that i tell them to kiss my ass?

No, but I think you can minimize other activities outside of that. That’s like saying ‘losing weight is helpful although i hate it, but since I ate a Big Mac for lunch I may as well eat one for dinner’.

 

[jwhit2010]

I don't. If you're in a situation where you can be fairly distanced from others and can keep things sanitary and all that, then it's necessary to keep the world going. Now, and I haven't been keeping up w/ your posts, if it's gym, work, out for lunch, bar after work, run to the supermarket, repeat, then that's a different issue altogether.

I guess my question for you in a more general sense is this:

If, normally, there are 40 people at my gym when I go, and now there are 5 because the majority of folks are choosing to avoid what is probably the single easiest place to transmit or contract a virus, is it really appropriate for me to take advantage while others are "sacrificing" (loosely using that word for lack of a better one)? Because, sure, if there are only 5 people there, it's incredibly unlikely that anything will happen, at least at this point in time.

Id look at it as "do your part" and stay home. Otherwise people will start crawling back out of the caves and then there will be 8-9 there, then 12-13. Then someone will contaminate the place.

 

[anon_w4pknohc0ndth]

I don't. If you're in a situation where you can be fairly distanced from others and can keep things sanitary and all that, then it's necessary to keep the world going. Now, and I haven't been keeping up w/ your posts, if it's gym, work, out for lunch, bar after work, run to the supermarket, repeat, then that's a different issue altogether.

I guess my question for you in a more general sense is this:

If, normally, there are 40 people at my gym when I go, and now there are 5 because the majority of folks are choosing to avoid what is probably the single easiest place to transmit or contract a virus, is it really appropriate for me to take advantage while others are "sacrificing" (loosely using that word for lack of a better one)? Because, sure, if there are only 5 people there, it's incredibly unlikely that anything will happen, at least at this point in time.

For me it's gym then work then home that's it. I've been to a restuarant once in the last month. My job allows me to go to the gym whenever i want so I go early when there are only a few people or even no one else at all there. The gym is also a very clean place as long as the staff does their job and the members wipe the equipment down. My chances of getting sick or getting someone else sick are exponentially higher here at work than they are in the gym.

 

[anon_w4pknohc0ndth]

No, but I think you can minimize other activities outside of that. That’s like saying ‘losing weight is helpful although i hate it, but since I ate a Big Mac for lunch I may as well eat one for dinner’.

I workout and i work. Thats pretty minimal.

 

[RoyDawgMercer]

That is what annoys people, your last sentence, you have absolutely no way of knowing that, yet profess it like it is the gospel.

Just announced by WH.

 

[RoyDawgMercer]

For me it's gym then work then home that's it. I've been to a restuarant once in the last month. My job allows me to go to the gym whenever i want so I go early when there are only a few people or even no one else at all there. The gym is also a very clean place as long as the staff does their job and the members wipe the equipment down. My chances of getting sick or getting someone else sick are exponentially higher here at work than they are in the gym.

Recent data for UK is virus can survive for up to 9 days on surfaces. You wanna take a risk going to a gym where God knows who has been in there OR how good anything is cleaned? Ok. That sounds like a well thought through plan to me.

 

[anon_w4pknohc0ndth]

Recent data for UK is virus can survive for up to 9 days on surfaces. You wanna take a risk going to a gym where God knows who has been in there OR how good anything is cleaned? Ok. That sounds like a well thought through plan to me.

Yes.

 

[RoyDawgMercer]

Yes.

 

[CaesarDawgamus]

It's almost like this whole scenario is an IQ test in a way. Most people were not taking it seriously just a couple weeks, myself included. I shared that video from Dr. Drew that was ridiculed by some (rightly so in hindsight) but defended by many. If you haven't come around since then, you are most likely have a low IQ in my opinion. It is not hard to educate yourself on the facts.

For the record, I've never paid attention to celebrities and politics, I'm kind of a sports or bust kinda person. I stumbled across the Dr. Drew video after YouTubing "Cornoa Virus". I don't know much about the guy (obviously I have heard of him) but I thought he was legit. I actually still do not know much about him but I've noticed he's been pushed on Fox News lately, so I can only assume he has a political bias on this.

Bothering me I'm still being mocked for that as of last night, but it is what it is.

There are always alternative arguments, and just because they don't match one person's perspective doesn't mean that the other person has a low IQ. Frankly, that mindset further alienates some people that would otherwise be convinced to alter their behavior even though they do not agree with the requests to do so. For example, a friend of mine who is a highly educated economist prof has a very different perspective, which is based on the economist's tendency to view things from both a desired and undesired consequences perspective. There are always alternative viewpoints...I support the social distancing guidelines that we've been asked to follow...however, I think in retrospect and based on long term analysis, which we obviously don't have the benefit of at this point in time, there will be questions about whether or not we really needed to crush our economy over a virus that will likely end up killing fewer people than the seasonal flu - which we already have a vaccine for and that many people won't get - despite the fact that they're more likely to be killed by it than covid-19.

 

[atlanta cock#]

and will be studied and referenced for decades.

I think one of the most interesting things (and not trying to diminish the actual situation itself) is this question: How do you get an entire population to take recommended measures seriously without essentially scaring them to death with what will happen if they don't?

There are, even now, a shitload of people who either don't believe how bad this can get if we don't act now, or seemingly don't care or understand. Just imagine if the message was solely, "Try to avoid it, but don't freak out if you get it, because most people have few to no symptoms, or get a little sick for a few days and are fine after that."

Lastly, it's interesting to me that, while on one hand we are equipped to spread the disease far more easily than ever before, thanks to technology and the ease of sharing knowledge and information, we are far more equipped to fight, mitigate, prevent, and cure it than ever before.

What I've observed thus far is there is no middle ground. People are either scared shitless or as calm as can be.

 

[anon_w4pknohc0ndth]

What I've observed thus far is there is no middle ground. People are either scared shitless or as calm as can be.

 

[TanyardDawg520]

There are always alternative arguments, and just because they don't match one person's perspective doesn't mean that the other person has a low IQ. Frankly, that mindset further alienates some people that would otherwise be convinced to alter their behavior even though they do not agree with the requests to do so. For example, a friend of mine who is a highly educated economist prof has a very different perspective, which is based on the economist's tendency to view things from both a desired and undesired consequences perspective. There are always alternative viewpoints...I support the social distancing guidelines that we've been asked to follow...however, I think in retrospect and based on long term analysis, which we obviously don't have the benefit of at this point in time, there will be questions about whether or not we really needed to crush our economy over a virus that will likely end up killing fewer people than the seasonal flu - which we already have a vaccine for and that many people won't get - despite the fact that they're more likely to be killed by it than covid-19.

I corrected my IQ remark later in the thread. That was wrong on my part.

 

[Billy Zane]

What I've observed thus far is there is no middle ground. People are either scared shitless or as calm as can be.

One of the things that keeps me calm is the fear of getting on the news in some stock footage buying a gross of Tampax, or elbowing some poor old lady to get the last of the Chunky Soup.

Nossir, I'll take my chances rather than have a friend DVR that shit and lord it over me now and after a return to normalcy.