T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Will rephrase “aside from state regulations regarding physician assisted suicide laws, is there any evidence that states or the CDC is masking the cause(s) of death when reporting COVID deaths”.
Who's Going to Pay the Bills?: Purpose-Driven Coronavirus Business Shutdowns Cause Economic Catastrophe
- Status
P
Peeps
Guest
Depends on where you live in the U.S. Down South, big bugs abound! And the humidity can turn a Tupperware of flour or rice into a brick!
Also, a lot of families down South have no basement for storage, and no garage.
Even our house (a Midwestern 3-bedroom ranch) does not have a ton of space for storage of food.
farronwolf
New member
10 lbs of flour is easy enough to put in the freezer. Rice the same. Works wonderfully. Just have to think outside the box a little bit.
J
jeannetherese
Guest
Don’t throw out those bricks! if your sugar/salt/flour is just hard, but otherwise sound, a cheese grater is your friend.
Best wishes!
jt
Best wishes!
jt
1
1cthlctrth
Guest
Continuing disaster resulting from coronavirus-related business shutdowns:
During the week ending April 4, 6.6 million people filed new unemployment claims as coronavirus-related economic shutdowns continue to create weeks of job loss numbers that are exponentially higher than anything previously seen in U.S. history, CNBC reported.
The nearly 17 million people who have filed new unemployment claims in the past three weeks represents roughly 10% of the entire workforce, based on the most recent monthly jobs report.
The week ending March 21 saw 3.3 million claims, followed by the week ending March 28 with 6.9 million new claims. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the most unemployment claims ever filed in a single week was roughly 700,000 during one week in 1982.
The unemployment rate rose to 4.4% in March, and former Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen told House Democrats on a conference call this week that she believes the unemployment rate is at least 13% right now.
Contributing to the increased unemployment rate are the roughly 1.3 million people who not only lost their jobs, but were unable to look for new ones due to coronavirus restrictions. While the headline unemployment rate is 4.4%, it increases to 8.7% when factoring in people who are underemployed or not looking for work.
During the week ending April 4, 6.6 million people filed new unemployment claims as coronavirus-related economic shutdowns continue to create weeks of job loss numbers that are exponentially higher than anything previously seen in U.S. history, CNBC reported.
The nearly 17 million people who have filed new unemployment claims in the past three weeks represents roughly 10% of the entire workforce, based on the most recent monthly jobs report.
The week ending March 21 saw 3.3 million claims, followed by the week ending March 28 with 6.9 million new claims. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the most unemployment claims ever filed in a single week was roughly 700,000 during one week in 1982.
The unemployment rate rose to 4.4% in March, and former Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen told House Democrats on a conference call this week that she believes the unemployment rate is at least 13% right now.
Contributing to the increased unemployment rate are the roughly 1.3 million people who not only lost their jobs, but were unable to look for new ones due to coronavirus restrictions. While the headline unemployment rate is 4.4%, it increases to 8.7% when factoring in people who are underemployed or not looking for work.
Last edited:
JoeFreedom
New member
Just reported is that Smithfield Foods, a meat plant in California, that provides nearly 20 million meals per day to the United States, will be closing for a minimum of 14 days, since 139 workers have come down with COVID.
The dominoes are continuing to fall. If our food supply chain and distribution succumbs to the “all or nothing” response we will see such severe levels of death and despair the likes of the Great Depression only winked at.
But I suppose if we throw another 6 trillion at it, the problem should go away.
The dominoes are continuing to fall. If our food supply chain and distribution succumbs to the “all or nothing” response we will see such severe levels of death and despair the likes of the Great Depression only winked at.
But I suppose if we throw another 6 trillion at it, the problem should go away.
Last edited:
G
goout
Guest
One positive to come out of this is, the hysterically biased liberal national media is getting their heads handed to them. And the thing is, people like Jim Acosta and Todd are so aggrandized with power and honor they don’t even know how irrelevant they are. Which is just fine. With each “gotcha” question, they dig themselves an ever deeper hole.
Out of all the groups that can be surveyed, the media is the one at the bottom of the respect barrel, as it should be.
Out of all the groups that can be surveyed, the media is the one at the bottom of the respect barrel, as it should be.
Last edited:
P
phaster
Guest
sad but true that too few think about consequences AND too many essentially worship celebrities/money
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
A
AlNg
Guest
I don’t know who was behind this decision to shutdown 80% of the whole country. There are other ways, much less drastic and much less harmful, to combat this virus. This shutting down of businesses is going to be even more disastrous as time goes on. I know people who have had the corona virus and yes it was bad for a few days, but they recovered all right within two weeks and are back to normal now.
W
whatistrue
Guest
So the 23,000+ deaths in the US so far are not enough (or are maybe imaginary)? How many would be enough?
farronwolf
New member
What state do you live in? I am certain your Governor, County Judge, Mayor, and yes the President all had a say in what can/should remain open and what should be closed.
They listened to the people whom they appointed to various positions in their respective governments to make their decisions.
Did you employer make a decision as to whether or not you were going to continue to work, or work from a remote location. What did they base that decision on?
They listened to the people whom they appointed to various positions in their respective governments to make their decisions.
Did you employer make a decision as to whether or not you were going to continue to work, or work from a remote location. What did they base that decision on?
S
Socrates92
Guest
People in positions of power made decisions with drastic consequences from which they will be personally shielded, yes. What’s your point?
farronwolf
New member
He stated he didn’t know who was responsible for shutting down 80% of the country. He simply needs to look at who in his area was responsible for the answer.
Your point?
Your point?
W
Weserthy
Guest
The main issue is that those in charge that are making recommendations about how to contain and slow the spread of the virus are concerned only with one thing - minimizing infections and deaths. This is an admirable goal, but one also has to realize that there are other considerations that must be taken into account. We cannot simply shutdown the entire country for three months without consequences. A lot of people are looking at the record unemployment numbers, and saying “meh, it will all go back to normal when this is over.” But this is almost certainly not true. Not everyone who is laid off now will get their job back when this pandemic is over. Many businesses, especially small businesses, will not reopen when this is over. Many will have to curtail staff numbers after this is over. People are going to be out of work, and are going to owe back pay for rent, mortgages, etc., that were deferred during the pandemic. There’s going to be another housing crisis and foreclosures are going to be through the roof. It’s going to be ugly, and people probably aren’t ready for how bad it is truly going to be. And this is all assuming that things go back to normal in a month or two at the latest.
I think people are going to have to accept that at some point we are going to have to cut our losses and take the risk of opening things up with the virus still going around. Everyone is assuming that the virus is going to pretty much disappear in the summer, and then we’ll be in the clear. But that is not likely going to be the case. It will still be around, though it probably won’t spread as quickly, just like the regular flu. But it will still spread. And then if there is a second wave next fall, what are we going to do - lock down for 3+ months again? During the holiday season, when most retailers make most of their profits for the year? Continuous, recurring lockdowns are not sustainable, and are only going to lead millions more below the poverty line.
I think in the end, people will get tired of the lockdowns and come around to this thinking. Most people support the measures being taken now, and the politicians can do what they’re doing now because they enjoy widespread support for the most part. But get back to me in 2-3 months and see if people are still supportive and aren’t getting tired of being cooped up at home if the lockdowns are still going on by then. We’ll see if people want to go through all of this again in the fall if there’s another wave. Sooner or later people will view the cure as worse than the disease and the support will erode and politicians will cave to the pressure to save their favorability ratings. The current situation will not last forever, one way or another.
I think people are going to have to accept that at some point we are going to have to cut our losses and take the risk of opening things up with the virus still going around. Everyone is assuming that the virus is going to pretty much disappear in the summer, and then we’ll be in the clear. But that is not likely going to be the case. It will still be around, though it probably won’t spread as quickly, just like the regular flu. But it will still spread. And then if there is a second wave next fall, what are we going to do - lock down for 3+ months again? During the holiday season, when most retailers make most of their profits for the year? Continuous, recurring lockdowns are not sustainable, and are only going to lead millions more below the poverty line.
I think in the end, people will get tired of the lockdowns and come around to this thinking. Most people support the measures being taken now, and the politicians can do what they’re doing now because they enjoy widespread support for the most part. But get back to me in 2-3 months and see if people are still supportive and aren’t getting tired of being cooped up at home if the lockdowns are still going on by then. We’ll see if people want to go through all of this again in the fall if there’s another wave. Sooner or later people will view the cure as worse than the disease and the support will erode and politicians will cave to the pressure to save their favorability ratings. The current situation will not last forever, one way or another.
JoeFreedom
New member
Yes. Let’s see the support after 3 more months of lockdown…
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
It was the independent good judgement of the governors of the various states.1cthlctrth:
I don’t know who was behind this decision to shutdown 80% of the whole country.
How about listing some of them.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
The governors of the states who made these decisions are of the community. They have friends and relatives in the community. They are not totally shielded from the consequences of their decisions. And they are elected, so they are putting their career on the line too. They make the best decisions they can for the best reasons possible.
S
Socrates92
Guest
I suppose I was reading something into your post that wasn’t there and decided to lash out. My apologies.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
You won’t see it because there will not be 3 more months of this lockdown. There will be a gradual roll-out of a return to normalcy.
S
Socrates92
Guest
Some of them, perhaps. Others definitely just seem to be enjoying the power. You can’t look at some of the arbitrary measures being put out and tell me with a straight face that every politician out there is making decisions solely with their brain. (If you can, that’s a pretty big insult to said politicians.) To say that they are not “totally shielded” is kind of a moot point. To imply that they’ll have to endure a comparable level of hardship to someone who has to feed a family but is looking at potentially months of unemployment is absurd. They’re suffering no financial difficultly. The risk of not getting re-election is there in normal times. It comes with the territory of being in politics.
- Status