What If?

[seataccat]

We had around 2,400 deaths at Pearl Harbor and nearly 3,000 on 9-11. Last Friday, the US lost 2,057 people to Covid-19 in a single day.

Ok, that's fine. But in fairness, and I want to be VERY clear I'm not downplaying the Corona. But why are these numbers any more shocking and more important than the numbers we see every day of every year for other things? Why is 2,057 Codid deaths worse or on par with what we saw on 9/11 or Pearl Harbor? But the thousands that die every single day of cancer, heart disease, accidents etc. just ho-hum par for the course? This is what I'm always failing to grasp. What makes the tiny percentage of Covid deaths we see way more important and way less worrisome than the deaths we see every day from something else? Even though the something else kills far more?

Ilovethecats is 100% correct. According to the CDC, the flu killed an estimated 60,000+ in 2018. We don’t shut down the nation in a bad flu season. I do believe that social distancing is critical until a cure or vaccine is developed because this spreads so easily, but people should be allowed to make a living.

A typical flu season kills ~20,000 – 60,000 people in the U.S. out of 39-56 million infections per year. That is a 12 month season. Currently SARS-COV2 has killed 17,108 in ~ 6 weeks and infected 577,408. That is orders of magnitude worse than the seasonal flu, like 40 times worse. Now of course the death toll will probably not be the 7% that the total numbers are showing now. However this is a virus that nobody has ever seen and most epidemiologists are predicting 1%-2+% death rate. If you extrapolate that to the 39-56 million people that typically get the flu in a calendar year in the U.S. that is a freakin' scary number. You may be right that this will be just another seasonal flu that will blow over when the weather gets warm, but you are probably wrong. Pandemics do not behave the same way seasonal outbreaks do. For the National Academies’ report, researchers looked at the history of flu pandemics as an example. “There have been 10 influenza pandemics in the past 250-plus years — two started in the Northern Hemisphere winter, three in the spring, two in the summer and three in the fall,” the report said. “All had a peak second wave approximately six months after emergence of the virus in the human population, regardless of when the initial introduction occurred.”

I agree with your numbers. I have stated that Covid19 is much more contagious. I have stated the tremendous importance of a treatment and vaccine. Social distancing is very important.

However, can you tell me that opening up Walmart is less dangerous than allowing a shopper to enter a Universal Athletic store? Did you know that Bob Wards is considered an essential business and open, while Universal Athletic cannot open? Would letting small businesses like UAS operate with some social distancing and cleaning guidelines be so bad? Is that worse than what we are doing right now?

Maybe there should be more accountability by each individual. I was in Walmart yesterday picking up some groceries. I noticed a couple shopping with a 2 or 3 month old infant. Couldn’t one of the parents stay home with that infant while the other shopped? It makes no sense.

Peace Bro, I agree with pretty much everything you said. I do agree that we should have the freedom to open and run any business we want and people certainly need to be accountable for each other safety. I'm just pointing out that this pandemic may or may not be like the seasonal flu. The experts don't even know but there models can predict it is potentially really effing bad. Time will tell and I personally am hoping for a vaccine sooner than later. I have no realistic hope that a cure will ever happen.

[ilovethecats]

That was the kind of response I was expecting the first time.

And you've played all this out before coming to your decision:

you'd run your school buses on days when the roads were deemed unsafe to drive because you feel that the students reward of education on those days outweighs the risk of driving them to school and your primary obligation to them is there schooling. You must then think school bus operators are wrong to shut down on these days. And if they did have accidents and students were killed and injured in those accidents, that you'd continue to support your decision to have the school buses running despite the conditions. It's then safe to assume that you'd be okay, since you own the bus company, with delivering the news to the parents of the deceased that it was your decision to run the buses and that you'll continue to do so since the death of that child is worth the additional education that the student received on those days that they would've missed.

Yes, in the scenario you lined up, I would be fine with all of those stipulations. Every hundred thousand trips or so if there was an accident that resulted in a death I would perform the hard task of telling the family. I would perform my duty of telling them as I'm sure every other business owner would be forced to do with the many more deaths their companies were responsible for.

However, who would be responsible for dealing with the many other unavoidable consequences that these families unable to work or go to school would endure. I saw in some states suicide rates have doubled. In addition to domestic abuse, people going without food, losing homes and jobs? I assume there would be a task force or something to handle these situations as well as deaths resulting from people being able to make a living?

If there was such a task force, fine with dealing with these consequences and deaths, I'd do my part as well. I assume that we'd all treat all of the deaths with the respect they deserve, and not pretend the deaths of those riding the bus were any more important than other deaths!

I think we're on the same page!

Not on the same page

A tornado just swept through SE USA yesterday through a population of about 25 million people and killed only 19. That's less than one per million. Despite the weather service warning, based on your logic, there's no need to tell anyone to seek shelter, because it isn't very likely that they would be killed or injured and the amount of time they wasted taking shelter isn't worth the time and productivity.

Then there's wars. A very small percentage of people that go off to fight wars for the USA recently, even ones that are entered into on false rationale, die or are injured. So there's another decision, based on your logic, to make that doesn't involve the risk of life, since it's so small. The main issue is the hit to the economy.

I disagree. Now, if the government forced everyone to stay in their homes and not work and go to school because of the tornado that would be the same. I’m totally fine with them telling people to take cover because a tornado is coming. Just like I’m totally fine with the government taking certain precautions in regards to the virus. Even social distancing guidelines.

I really don’t think forcing people to not make a living is the same as a tornado warning. You don’t think Americans would have an issue if we were told today the economy would be shut down for months or years because a tornado is coming at some point?

[TomCat88]

That was the kind of response I was expecting the first time.

And you've played all this out before coming to your decision:

you'd run your school buses on days when the roads were deemed unsafe to drive because you feel that the students reward of education on those days outweighs the risk of driving them to school and your primary obligation to them is there schooling. You must then think school bus operators are wrong to shut down on these days. And if they did have accidents and students were killed and injured in those accidents, that you'd continue to support your decision to have the school buses running despite the conditions. It's then safe to assume that you'd be okay, since you own the bus company, with delivering the news to the parents of the deceased that it was your decision to run the buses and that you'll continue to do so since the death of that child is worth the additional education that the student received on those days that they would've missed.

Yes, in the scenario you lined up, I would be fine with all of those stipulations. Every hundred thousand trips or so if there was an accident that resulted in a death I would perform the hard task of telling the family. I would perform my duty of telling them as I'm sure every other business owner would be forced to do with the many more deaths their companies were responsible for.

However, who would be responsible for dealing with the many other unavoidable consequences that these families unable to work or go to school would endure. I saw in some states suicide rates have doubled. In addition to domestic abuse, people going without food, losing homes and jobs? I assume there would be a task force or something to handle these situations as well as deaths resulting from people being able to make a living?

If there was such a task force, fine with dealing with these consequences and deaths, I'd do my part as well. I assume that we'd all treat all of the deaths with the respect they deserve, and not pretend the deaths of those riding the bus were any more important than other deaths!

I think we're on the same page!

Not on the same page

A tornado just swept through SE USA yesterday through a population of about 25 million people and killed only 19. That's less than one per million. Despite the weather service warning, based on your logic, there's no need to tell anyone to seek shelter, because it isn't very likely that they would be killed or injured and the amount of time they wasted taking shelter isn't worth the time and productivity.

Then there's wars. A very small percentage of people that go off to fight wars for the USA recently, even ones that are entered into on false rationale, die or are injured. So there's another decision, based on your logic, to make that doesn't involve the risk of life, since it's so small. The main issue is the hit to the economy.

I disagree. Now, if the government forced everyone to stay in their homes and not work and go to school because of the tornado that would be the same. I’m totally fine with them telling people to take cover because a tornado is coming. Just like I’m totally fine with the government taking certain precautions in regards to the virus. Even social distancing guidelines.

I really don’t think forcing people to not make a living is the same as a tornado warning. You don’t think Americans would have an issue if we were told today the economy would be shut down for months or years because a tornado is coming at some point?

Are you a bot? The government/businesses DO force their employees/students to take cover. In fact, they even make them do drills "in the event of an emergency." I mean they even make them practice for it. What a waste of time, huh!?! It's government control at its worst, I tell ya!!!

[TomCat88]

Good news for everyone is that the 'Rona (Yes, I hate that term, too) is dying down. That's just my guess based on the figures. Hope that's OK that I'm making this announcement. If I'm wrong, oh well, lots of people have been wrong about this.

Anyhoo, only 7 cases in Montana today and NY had a big drop and a nice drop in our country and worldwide. Unless, of course, you think other countries are lying.

[TomCat88]

What if...

...we form a temporary league with just Montana, NoDak, and SoDak. Play a home and home with UM, USD, UND, SDSU and NDSU. Ten games and pick up another home game vs. a Frontier team. Those three states are relatively Covid-free now. Players could come to camp early and stay in the dorms with everyone getting there own room and only X number of players on a floor. Open up food services (MSU would have a big advantage there ) and provide other amenities.

I like the idea of having a backup plan. But MSU can never, ever, ever, ever, ever play a Frontier team.

[ilovethecats]

[quote=TomCat88 post_id=703994 time=1586820043

Are you a bot? The government/businesses DO force their employees/students to take cover. In fact, they even make them do drills "in the event of an emergency." I mean they even make them practice for it. What a waste of time, huh!?! It's government control at its worst, I tell ya!!!
[/quote]

Wait what? Of course they do. Just like any emergency. You’ll have to show me where I disputed that?

My point was comparing what we’re being asked to do right now to a severe weather warning for a tornado is not even in the same ballpark. You really think it is?

I’m seeing what you guys are trying to do and that’s ok. I personally don’t think weather warnings or even drills in preparation for emergencies is the same thing as weeks, now months, and possibly into years of shelter in place and lockdowns. How are they anywhere near the same thing?

What’s a bot?

[Cat_gld]

[quote=TomCat88 post_id=703994 time=1586820043

Are you a bot? The government/businesses DO force their employees/students to take cover. In fact, they even make them do drills "in the event of an emergency." I mean they even make them practice for it. What a waste of time, huh!?! It's government control at its worst, I tell ya!!!

Wait what? Of course they do. Just like any emergency. You’ll have to show me where I disputed that?

My point was comparing what we’re being asked to do right now to a severe weather warning for a tornado is not even in the same ballpark. You really think it is?

I’m seeing what you guys are trying to do and that’s ok. I personally don’t think weather warnings or even drills in preparation for emergencies is the same thing as weeks, now months, and possibly into years of shelter in place and lockdowns. How are they anywhere near the same thing?

What’s a bot?
[/quote]

Look in the mirror!

[TomCat88]

[quote=TomCat88 post_id=703994 time=1586820043

Are you a bot? The government/businesses DO force their employees/students to take cover. In fact, they even make them do drills "in the event of an emergency." I mean they even make them practice for it. What a waste of time, huh!?! It's government control at its worst, I tell ya!!!

Wait what? Of course they do. Just like any emergency. You’ll have to show me where I disputed that?

My point was comparing what we’re being asked to do right now to a severe weather warning for a tornado is not even in the same ballpark. You really think it is?

I’m seeing what you guys are trying to do and that’s ok. I personally don’t think weather warnings or even drills in preparation for emergencies is the same thing as weeks, now months, and possibly into years of shelter in place and lockdowns. How are they anywhere near the same thing?

What’s a bot?
[/quote]

You must not be one. They never screw up the quote function.

[TomCat88]

What if...

...we form a temporary league with just Montana, NoDak, and SoDak. Play a home and home with UM, USD, UND, SDSU and NDSU. Ten games and pick up another home game vs. a Frontier team. Those three states are relatively Covid-free now. Players could come to camp early and stay in the dorms with everyone getting there own room and only X number of players on a floor. Open up food services (MSU would have a big advantage there ) and provide other amenities.

I like the idea of having a backup plan. But MSU can never, ever, ever, ever, ever play a Frontier team.

I've changed my mind. I think MSU''s (Montana's) backup plan should be to play EVERY Frontier team from Montana. That's seven games with six at home, including home-and-home with UM. I think the Montana Frontier schools should play home-and-home vs each other.

[Montanabob]

What if...

...we form a temporary league with just Montana, NoDak, and SoDak. Play a home and home with UM, USD, UND, SDSU and NDSU. Ten games and pick up another home game vs. a Frontier team. Those three states are relatively Covid-free now. Players could come to camp early and stay in the dorms with everyone getting there own room and only X number of players on a floor. Open up food services (MSU would have a big advantage there ) and provide other amenities.

I like the idea of having a backup plan. But MSU can never, ever, ever, ever, ever play a Frontier team.

I've changed my mind. I think MSU''s (Montana's) backup plan should be to play EVERY Frontier team from Montana. That's seven games with six at home, including home-and-home with UM. I think the Montana Frontier schools should play home-and-home vs each other.

Someone has been quarantined for too long

[TomCat88]

What if...

...we form a temporary league with just Montana, NoDak, and SoDak. Play a home and home with UM, USD, UND, SDSU and NDSU. Ten games and pick up another home game vs. a Frontier team. Those three states are relatively Covid-free now. Players could come to camp early and stay in the dorms with everyone getting there own room and only X number of players on a floor. Open up food services (MSU would have a big advantage there ) and provide other amenities.

I like the idea of having a backup plan. But MSU can never, ever, ever, ever, ever play a Frontier team.

I've changed my mind. I think MSU''s (Montana's) backup plan should be to play EVERY Frontier team from Montana. That's seven games with six at home, including home-and-home with UM. I think the Montana Frontier schools should play home-and-home vs each other.

Someone has been quarantined for too long

That's for sure, but what's your backup plan? Would you really rather not play any games, if the Big Sky can't go and there aren't any FCS teams from other states that allow their schools to play?

[Montanabob]

What if...

...we form a temporary league with just Montana, NoDak, and SoDak. Play a home and home with UM, USD, UND, SDSU and NDSU. Ten games and pick up another home game vs. a Frontier team. Those three states are relatively Covid-free now. Players could come to camp early and stay in the dorms with everyone getting there own room and only X number of players on a floor. Open up food services (MSU would have a big advantage there ) and provide other amenities.

I like the idea of having a backup plan. But MSU can never, ever, ever, ever, ever play a Frontier team.

I've changed my mind. I think MSU''s (Montana's) backup plan should be to play EVERY Frontier team from Montana. That's seven games with six at home, including home-and-home with UM. I think the Montana Frontier schools should play home-and-home vs each other.

Someone has been quarantined for too long

That's for sure, but what's your backup plan? Would you really rather not play any games, if the Big Sky can't go and there aren't any FCS teams from other states that allow their schools to play?

I think if school is in session, we will play. If no school, no season

[TomCat88]

What if...

...we form a temporary league with just Montana, NoDak, and SoDak. Play a home and home with UM, USD, UND, SDSU and NDSU. Ten games and pick up another home game vs. a Frontier team. Those three states are relatively Covid-free now. Players could come to camp early and stay in the dorms with everyone getting there own room and only X number of players on a floor. Open up food services (MSU would have a big advantage there ) and provide other amenities.

I like the idea of having a backup plan. But MSU can never, ever, ever, ever, ever play a Frontier team.

I've changed my mind. I think MSU''s (Montana's) backup plan should be to play EVERY Frontier team from Montana. That's seven games with six at home, including home-and-home with UM. I think the Montana Frontier schools should play home-and-home vs each other.

Someone has been quarantined for too long

That's for sure, but what's your backup plan? Would you really rather not play any games, if the Big Sky can't go and there aren't any FCS teams from other states that allow their schools to play?

I think if school is in session, we will play.

Who would MSU play in football?

[91catAlum]

What if...

...we form a temporary league with just Montana, NoDak, and SoDak. Play a home and home with UM, USD, UND, SDSU and NDSU. Ten games and pick up another home game vs. a Frontier team. Those three states are relatively Covid-free now. Players could come to camp early and stay in the dorms with everyone getting there own room and only X number of players on a floor. Open up food services (MSU would have a big advantage there ) and provide other amenities.

I like the idea of having a backup plan. But MSU can never, ever, ever, ever, ever play a Frontier team.

I've changed my mind. I think MSU''s (Montana's) backup plan should be to play EVERY Frontier team from Montana. That's seven games with six at home, including home-and-home with UM. I think the Montana Frontier schools should play home-and-home vs each other.

Someone has been quarantined for too long

That's for sure, but what's your backup plan? Would you really rather not play any games, if the Big Sky can't go and there aren't any FCS teams from other states that allow their schools to play?

I think if school is in session, we will play.

Who would MSU play in football?

We'll play the schools in our conference who are not still in lockdown next fall. Thats a definite question mark for schools in WA, OR, CA but if MSU is playing I'd guess the Utah, Colorado and Idaho schools will be playing. Thats 7 of our 11 scheduled games. Add a second UM game to pad our schedule a bit and that gets us to 8 games.