Coronavirus Coronavirus: In-Iowa General Discussion (Not Limited)

Status
Not open for further replies.

dmclone

Well-Known Member
Oct 20, 2006
19,431
3,524
113
50131
So when Governor Reynolds says she is doing everything she can, that is simply not true.
It's a balancing act. She could shut down the borders and every business in the state but I don't think any is recommending that action.
 

Acylum

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2006
10,278
9,779
113
Okay so I'm confused now.. If you don't spread the virus, the virus doesn't jump around, and therefore the virus is kept under control. Right? I mean the reality is that lots of people are going to get this over the next year, but if you nip it in the bud right away, everyone doesn't get it at one time, and then hospitals don't get overrun.

We're not going to eliminate the spread or stop the spread completely, that would only happen if we could put a pause button on everyone for like a month which is not possible.
I think you finally get it!
 

Statefan10

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
May 20, 2019
16,178
18,194
113
I think at some point we may see tighter restrictions here in Iowa. I'd put the chances at 60-40 to 70-30. However, do you see the benefit in waiting as long as possible to do that? The economical and psychological benefits of trying to shorten the time involved in a SAH situation? You've been clamoring for that for quite a while now, and so far it hasn't been needed. It may very well be needed at some point, but I'm glad we haven't reached that point yet.
I can see positives on both sides. Those that currently are still working and the businesses still open are able to keep bringing in money to help themselves out. That's a good thing.

The bad thing is we could not be doing enough and the people who are getting sick right now might be inching us closer to our hospitals getting overrun. If they were to end up getting it later on, the hospitals would've been able to handle it.

We won't be able to know for sure what's going to happen until it happens.
 

FOREVERTRUE

Well-Known Member
Sep 18, 2017
849
866
93
43
These are commercial electricians and plumbers, the kind working on job sites, not, I have a problem with my sink. Fixing cars maybe, but they are also still selling new ones.
True Value is a essential businesses during a pandemic, what I have to get my yard ready to mow or need dog treats?

You realize that these commercial electricians and plumbers are helping to keep the food manufacturing plant that I work at running, right hence they may be even more essential than domestic elect/plumbers (also essential),

I think Ideally you want to flatten the curve just enough to not overwhelm the hospitals to keep the deaths as low as possible, but to get the country back and going as quickly as possible.

The other option is to try to completely flatten it up until the vaccine is available then lift the SIP's which would completely slaughter the economy especially small businesses, but lower the deaths directly attributed to Covid-19. So if drastic SIP for the next 14-18 months is what you think we need you will have fewer direct deaths but is it worth the indirect costs?
 

SEIOWA CLONE

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2018
4,421
4,460
113
60
As I have stated numerous times:

1. You can't say these type of electricians and plumbers are essential but these aren't. Plus infrastructure, aka working on job sites, is considered essential by Homeland Security. Mainly because they don't want construction to stop.

2. Essential workers still need new and used cars to get to their essential jobs. I am going to my used car dealership client this afternoon, they are open, but their sales are way down.

3. True Value is a hardware store and thus is essential. It also provides supplies for essential workers such as plumbers and electricians. I know one of my Plumber clients uses the Ace Hardware in his town a lot because it's more convenient. And once again they aren't going to say Hardware store XYZ is essential but ABC isn't because they will get their asses sued

Aren't they saying and doing that in other states, just not here in Iowa? What I have read, everything is closed in many states except grocery and gas stations. I spoke to my younger brother yesterday, he ordered a new rock truck a few months ago, and when he called the dealership, in Kansas, they told him that they are closed down and he cannot receive the truck until they open back up.

Its a slippery slope when a business gets to decide if its essential or not?
I mean there is a story today on the KCCI website about a horse sell today in Southern Iowa, over 100 people are suppose to be at the sell, mostly Amish, and Gov. Reynolds said this qualifies as part of the food chain, how does selling quarter horses qualify as part of the food chain, these are not draft horses to pull equipment for the Amish, these are horses for their buggy's.
 
Last edited:

Clonefan32

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2008
19,506
17,774
113
Any state that has consequences in place for disobeying the rules has teeth. We have guidelines and our Governor is hopeful our citizens will follow them. It's like telling your kids not to do something, they do it, and you don't enforce a punishment.

This argument skips to the end without considering the starting point. "The Rules" are going to be an ambiguous, unenforceable mess. There are examples on this board already of people's employers posturing themselves to be considered "essential". And there's zero chance the state is going to go around making a case-by-case determination of who fits and who doesn't.

Again, I'm all for an SIP. But just be realistic about it's impact.
 

Statefan10

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
May 20, 2019
16,178
18,194
113
It's a balancing act. She could shut down the borders and every business in the state but I don't think any is recommending that action.
That's also not being done by any other state so bringing that up isn't really fair. No one is asking Reynolds to not let people leave their house or leave the state.
 

Trice

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2010
5,589
8,733
113
Who can you say has actual teeth to their shelter in place? Go to those places with supposed strict measures and it's not hard to find tons of pictures in places like NY with strict orders and there are hundreds of idiots out milling around shoulder to shoulder. Now of course official SIP sets the stage to enforce with some teeth, but nobody's doing it all that well now.

Not saying we shouldn't have SIP in Iowa, but I don't think for practical purposes there is going to be as huge a difference in people being out and about between the current guidance and proclamation of the SiP. Vast majority of businesses are going to be considered essential like they have been elsewhere.

While the model gives a little leeway with the "closed non-essential services" option, it is REALLY sensitive to shelter in place orders and makes that binary. If SIP has to be binary, what do you think reflects Iowa's reality of human traffic better - SIP like other states have implemented, or business as usual?

Also, if you look at the Press-Citizen article it cites the COVIDactnow model as the basis to say Iowa hospitals will be over capacity by late April, their description of shelter in place is very close to what is happening in Iowa. On a continuum between "Shelter in place" and "Delay/distancing" they use, what is currently happening in Iowa is much closer to SIP. Despite idiots being out milling around in Iowa (just like states with SIP), most people are staying home.
I've been pretty well hunkered down and advocating for the same, including telling my employees that they must work from home, even though it is not nearly as productive.
I would like much stronger wording from the governor, and maybe even SIP. But I don't agree with the predictions using "No" in the SIP assumption when reality on the ground in Iowa fits a SIP description much better than the next available option.

Responding to all your posts at once...that's what I was getting at about the binary assumptions - it would seem like the model is probably too confident in those measures in the states that have them, and understates the effect that other states (like Iowa) that have partial mitigation measures that don't meet those New Zealand standards.
 

Statefan10

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
May 20, 2019
16,178
18,194
113
This argument skips to the end without considering the starting point. "The Rules" are going to be an ambiguous, unenforceable mess. There are examples on this board already of people's employers posturing themselves to be considered "essential". And there's zero chance the state is going to go around making a case-by-case determination of who fits and who doesn't.

Again, I'm all for an SIP. But just be realistic about it's impact.
No it's not going to be perfect, but I think the 45 other states who have done this measure have weighed those options as well. Saying we can't do this because it's "too hard" is ridiculous when other states are stepping up to the plate and are putting this in place.
 

Clonefan32

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2008
19,506
17,774
113
No it's not going to be perfect, but I think the 45 other states who have done this measure have weighed those options as well. Saying we can't do this because it's "too hard" is ridiculous when other states are stepping up to the plate and are putting this in place.

You are really caught up on the 45 other states thing. We have no proof it's produced any different outcome in those other states. We have no real indication that it's practically any different in those states than what is going on here. About 2 pages ago someone who lives in a state with a SIP said basically nothing changed. So she calls it a SIP because 45 other states did. Great. Where's that leave us?

You are so caught up in these three words and I just don't get it. Fine, she calls it a shelter in place and everyone continues doing exactly what they were doing before. Are you now happy? Again, I'm all for a SIP, but let's just be realistic about what it will accomplish.
 

Trice

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2010
5,589
8,733
113
You are really caught up on the 45 other states thing. We have no proof it's produced any different outcome in those other states. We have no real indication that it's practically any different in those states than what is going on here. About 2 pages ago someone who lives in a state with an SIP said basically nothing changed.

You are so caught up in these three words and I just don't get it. Fine, she calls it a shelter in place and everyone continues doing exactly what they were doing before. Are you now happy? Again, I'm all for a SIP, but let's just be realistic about what it will accomplish.

For the umpteenth time, if there's no practical difference in places with an SIP and what we're doing, then why wouldn't she just issue the SIP and end the debate? What is she holding out for? Is there any plausible reason for that?
 

PSYclone22

Visual Analytics Mercenary
SuperFanatic
Aug 15, 2012
4,159
2,352
113
Des Moines
For the umpteenth time, if there's no practical difference in places with an SIP and what we're doing, then why wouldn't she just issue the SIP and end the debate? What is she holding out for? Is there any plausible reason for that?
I am in favor of being as safe as possible as a population as it pertains to this. But to clonefan32's point, what does it matter at this point? Almost every person who would adhere to a shelter in place is already doing so.
 

Urbandale2013

Well-Known Member
Jan 28, 2018
3,521
4,214
113
28
Urbandale
For the umpteenth time, if there's no practical difference in places with an SIP and what we're doing, then why wouldn't she just issue the SIP and end the debate? What is she holding out for? Is there any plausible reason for that?
Frankly and I’m stepping over the line a bit but she’s stupid. At the same time I’m not trying to offend people but the people who are so invested in those words are stupid too.
 

Clonefan32

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2008
19,506
17,774
113
For the umpteenth time, if there's no practical difference in places with an SIP and what we're doing, then why wouldn't she just issue the SIP and end the debate? What is she holding out for? Is there any plausible reason for that?

I've yet to hear anyone put forth a compelling difference between the two, but if there is one I'm all ears. I looked at the California one posted above and I can't think of a single industry that couldn't somehow fit one of those definitions. I mean, look at some of these:

xiv.Businesses that supply products needed for people to work from home;

xv.Businesses that supply other essential businesses with the support or supplies necessary to operate;

xx.Professional services, such as legal or accounting services, when necessary to assist in compliance with legally mandated activities;

You don't think just about any business that's operating now couldn't shoe-horn their way into one of those?

Again, call it what you want. I just hope people don't think this is magically going to make people stay home because it's not the case. I'm all for being safe, and I'm distancing myself as much as I can. We've cut out anything even remotely extraneous, and I've encouraged anyone I know to do the same. But I'm just trying to be realistic about the level of shutdown we are going to see.
 

Al_4_State

Moderator
Staff member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 27, 2006
27,007
15,599
113
37
Driftless Region
Visit site
For the umpteenth time, if there's no practical difference in places with an SIP and what we're doing, then why wouldn't she just issue the SIP and end the debate? What is she holding out for? Is there any plausible reason for that?

It's a stubborn, stupid thing that she still doesn't call it what it is, but she really should just call it that and shut up people who won't take a breath until she uses the magic words.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Acylum

Statefan10

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
May 20, 2019
16,178
18,194
113
You are really caught up on the 45 other states thing. We have no proof it's produced any different outcome in those other states. We have no real indication that it's practically any different in those states than what is going on here. About 2 pages ago someone who lives in a state with a SIP said basically nothing changed. So she calls it a SIP because 45 other states did. Great. Where's that leave us?

You are so caught up in these three words and I just don't get it. Fine, she calls it a shelter in place and everyone continues doing exactly what they were doing before. Are you now happy? Again, I'm all for a SIP, but let's just be realistic about what it will accomplish.
I've already said she can call it whatever the hell she wants to call it, but regardless what she calls it, I believe she needs to do not only do more, but also re-evaluate her data/metrics. What's the tipping point of these elderly facilities? How many of those have to die before she ends up doing more? What percentage of those above 60 have to come down with this virus before she does something? If we have a higher population per capita than the state of Kansas and have more infected per 100,000 than they do, why are we not enforcing things like they are considering are states are similar?

See what I'm saying? She's waiting for things to get worse before she does more. That is the problem. If she does not believe things are going to get worse, then tell it like it is, stop tip toeing around questions, stop hiding your data, and be straight forward.
 

Clonefan32

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2008
19,506
17,774
113
I've already said she can call it whatever the hell she wants to call it, but regardless what she calls it, I believe she needs to do not only do more, but also re-evaluate her data/metrics. What's the tipping point of these elderly facilities? How many of those have to die before she ends up doing more? What percentage of those above 60 have to come down with this virus before she does something? If we have a higher population per capita than the state of Kansas and have more infected per 100,000 than they do, why are we not enforcing things like they are considering are states are similar?

See what I'm saying? She's waiting for things to get worse before she does more. That is the problem. If she does not believe things are going to get worse, then tell it like it is, stop tip toeing around questions, stop hiding your data, and be straight forward.

I'm genuinely curious what more you think she can do? Not saying she can't, I just am curious?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.