RLFANS.COM
Celebrating
22 years service to
the Rugby League
Community!
WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - US Presidential election 2020
::Off-topic discussion.
Re: US Presidential election 2020 Sun Jan 17, 2021 10:37 am  

User avatarMild Rover wrote:
Mild Rover User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 9:49 am
Posts: 11926
Location: Leicestershire.
I found this article from September last year interesting and persuasive. With hindsight, also prophetic, regarding the aftermath of the US election.

https://www.noemamag.com/welcome-to-the ... -twenties/

I think the historical examples of the Corn Laws-Peterloo-Whig reform and FDR’s New Deal are powerful because they will evoke positive responses across the political spectrum. I think the point about some liberal priorities being important (to liberals at least) and legitimate, but not really offering a solution to the underlying problems is fair. Not that you can’t have both greater social justice and economic reforms, but we do have to talk about both to get there.
'Thus I am tormented by my curiosity and humbled by my ignorance.' from History of an Old Bramin, The New York Mirror (A Weekly Journal Devoted to Literature and the Fine Arts), February 16th 1833.
Re: US Presidential election 2020 Mon Jan 18, 2021 11:36 am  

Zoo Zoo Boom wrote:
Zoo Zoo Boom Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 9:38 am
Posts: 359
The Ghost of '99 wrote:
Canadian cities are as densely populated as British cities. And the vast majority of Canadians - 80%+ live in those big cities.

They have a great, vast country. But nobody is living in most of it. Population density over an entire country is irrelevant.


There are vast distances between these cities: Toronto to Montreal is c350 miles, Toronto to Vancouver c2,700 miles so infection can be contained a lot more easily in large communities with plenty of distance between large conurbations rather than England where there are very small distances between concentrated conurbations?

How do you explain why Belgium has had such a bad time of it - population is c1,000 sq mile - there has to be a correlation?
Re: US Presidential election 2020 Mon Jan 18, 2021 12:01 pm  

User avatarDurham Giant wrote:
Durham Giant User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 8:25 pm
Posts: 12273
Location: Durham
Zoo Zoo Boom wrote:
There are vast distances between these cities: Toronto to Montreal is c350 miles, Toronto to Vancouver c2,700 miles so infection can be contained a lot more easily in large communities with plenty of distance between large conurbations rather than England where there are very small distances between concentrated conurbations?

How do you explain why Belgium has had such a bad time of it - population is c1,000 sq mile - there has to be a correlation?


My 14 year old son has a better understanding than you seem to



density in South Korea is 1,366 people per mile yet they have not had a bad a time as the UK plus being closer to China and with more links to the pandemic starting.

In Brazil it is 68.57 per mile but they have a huge number of deaths


That above should suggest that Other factors other than population density comes into it. One of the key factors in determine how bad Covid has struck has been political decisions on how best to deal with it ( although there are many other factors )

But in the top 10 worst affected countries the correlation between Covid is who is running the country ie politicians who denying it, refusing lockdowns, promoting herd immunity , effective dictatorships etc are big factors ie Brazil bolsonaro, Us Trump, Uk Boris, Russia Putin etc etc


Yes Canada may have big differences in distance between cities and maybe 200 years ago before people had Aeroplanes or Trains or Cars that might have made a difference BUT now people travel large distances very quickly . They don’t just travel on dog sled and horses . If you are in a pub in a big city in Belgium or Canada the virus spreads the same way
Huddersfield Giants 2013 over achievers

Huddersfield Giants 2014 under achievers ??????????
Re: US Presidential election 2020 Mon Jan 18, 2021 1:11 pm  
The Ghost of '99 User avatar
Free-scoring winger
Free-scoring winger

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:45 pm
Posts: 1758
Location: Desperation Island
Zoo Zoo Boom wrote:
There are vast distances between these cities: Toronto to Montreal is c350 miles, Toronto to Vancouver c2,700 miles so infection can be contained a lot more easily in large communities with plenty of distance between large conurbations rather than England where there are very small distances between concentrated conurbations?

How do you explain why Belgium has had such a bad time of it - population is c1,000 sq mile - there has to be a correlation?
I don't have anything to add to what DG says.
I don't understand why you can't get your head around what aren't terribly complicated concepts. Of course there is a correlation between how tightly packed people are at a very, very localised level - i.e. inside a supermarket or a pub. But that simply doesn't translate upwards to population density over a city, let alone a county/state or country. There are far more important variables than that random metric.
"Brian McDermott, with a wry smile, nods when asked if he remembers a specific incident which made him realise he was a prick. 'I do', he murmurs."
Re: US Presidential election 2020 Mon Jan 18, 2021 1:12 pm  

Zoo Zoo Boom wrote:
Zoo Zoo Boom Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 9:38 am
Posts: 359
Durham Giant wrote:
My 14 year old son has a better understanding than you seem to



density in South Korea is 1,366 people per mile yet they have not had a bad a time as the UK plus being closer to China and with more links to the pandemic starting.

In Brazil it is 68.57 per mile but they have a huge number of deaths


That above should suggest that Other factors other than population density comes into it. One of the key factors in determine how bad Covid has struck has been political decisions on how best to deal with it ( although there are many other factors )

But in the top 10 worst affected countries the correlation between Covid is who is running the country ie politicians who denying it, refusing lockdowns, promoting herd immunity , effective dictatorships etc are big factors ie Brazil bolsonaro, Us Trump, Uk Boris, Russia Putin etc etc


Yes Canada may have big differences in distance between cities and maybe 200 years ago before people had Aeroplanes or Trains or Cars that might have made a difference BUT now people travel large distances very quickly . They don’t just travel on dog sled and horses . If you are in a pub in a big city in Belgium or Canada the virus spreads the same way


I didn't say population density was the only cause but it will have been a contributory factor. Whilst you might get movement of people it will not be as prevalent as say movement between Leeds and Manchester - easy to go 30 miles in a car not so easy to do 300 or 2,000 Ottawa to Edmonton? Are you saying it is all political decisions that caused such a bad outcome?
Re: US Presidential election 2020 Mon Jan 18, 2021 1:14 pm  

Zoo Zoo Boom wrote:
Zoo Zoo Boom Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 9:38 am
Posts: 359
The Ghost of '99 wrote:
I don't have anything to add to what DG says.
I don't understand why you can't get your head around what aren't terribly complicated concepts. Of course there is a correlation between how tightly packed people are at a very, very localised level - i.e. inside a supermarket or a pub. But that simply doesn't translate upwards to population density over a city, let alone a county/state or country. There are far more important variables than that random metric.


How do you explain the huge increases in York and Harrogate - Mr. know-it-all?
Re: US Presidential election 2020 Mon Jan 18, 2021 1:33 pm  
WestEndThinker Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2020 5:38 am
Posts: 381
Zoo Zoo Boom wrote:
How do you explain the huge increases in York and Harrogate - Mr. know-it-all?

The more people are tested, the more cases there will be.
Re: US Presidential election 2020 Mon Jan 18, 2021 2:55 pm  

Zoo Zoo Boom wrote:
Zoo Zoo Boom Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 9:38 am
Posts: 359
WestEndThinker wrote:
The more people are tested, the more cases there will be.


So you are saying the cases were the same/thousand but not showing any symptoms - but all of a sudden they all started showing symptoms and the rate when up - are you for real?
Re: US Presidential election 2020 Mon Jan 18, 2021 9:41 pm  

User avatarDHM wrote:
DHM User avatar
Silver RLFANS Member
Silver RLFANS Member

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 4:13 pm
Posts: 8852
Location: Garth's Darkplace.
Durham Giant wrote:
My 14 year old son has a better understanding than you seem to



density in South Korea is 1,366 people per mile yet they have not had a bad a time as the UK plus being closer to China and with more links to the pandemic starting.

In Brazil it is 68.57 per mile but they have a huge number of deaths


That above should suggest that Other factors other than population density comes into it. One of the key factors in determine how bad Covid has struck has been political decisions on how best to deal with it ( although there are many other factors )

But in the top 10 worst affected countries the correlation between Covid is who is running the country ie politicians who denying it, refusing lockdowns, promoting herd immunity , effective dictatorships etc are big factors ie Brazil bolsonaro, Us Trump, Uk Boris, Russia Putin etc etc


Yes Canada may have big differences in distance between cities and maybe 200 years ago before people had Aeroplanes or Trains or Cars that might have made a difference BUT now people travel large distances very quickly . They don’t just travel on dog sled and horses . If you are in a pub in a big city in Belgium or Canada the virus spreads the same way


Indeed. A lot of "amateur epidemiologists" have been giving us the benefit of their opinion on daytime TV recently, including talking about "just shielding the over 80's as they are the only ones dying and letting the rest of us live normally" . Well, look at the numbers - around 50% of all deaths are in the 40-80 age bracket. No suggestions on how you would do that obviously.
There is absolutely no doubt that countries who have acted to initially effect a strong lockdown, and followed that with quarantine procedures to prevent re-entrance of infection and swift, decisive action when infection re-appears are currently way better off than those who have dragged their feet every time measures are needed.

I get it. People are really suffering now, both with and without the disease and wishing there was a better way. I do think that had this disease been awkward and a vaccine was going to take much longer then we would be faced with some very tough decisions and strategy may have been different. You must get business (small business's in particular) and the economy working again at some point or we all suffer more (eventually). But it happens that Covid 19 is not a particularly difficult one to create a vaccine for (it's all relative of course). I have heard it described by the people who first characterized it in the West as "clumsy". I have known since about June that we would have a vaccine deployed around end of November - beginning of December. In fact if the FDA hadn't been so worried about US public opinion on vaccines the AZ vaccine would have been with us before the Pfizer vaccine. If I knew that then the government knew that, so that's had a big bearing on strategy so far.

There will be other global pandemics of this nature, it's inevitable, but if we do not learn the lessons of what worked and what didn't and if we listen to those who think there is a radical approach that we didn't try that would have worked brilliantly (herd immunity, selective shielding etc) then we will have a disaster of even greater proportions than we have now. This isn't the first pandemic we've had and it's not the first highly infectious disease to spread through a region of the world. There are people who study this stuff and are "experts" in what works and what doesn't. We should listen to them.
"Well, I think in Rugby League if you head butt someone there's normally some repercusions"
Re: US Presidential election 2020 Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:26 pm  

Zoo Zoo Boom wrote:
Zoo Zoo Boom Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 9:38 am
Posts: 359
DHM wrote:
Indeed. A lot of "amateur epidemiologists" have been giving us the benefit of their opinion on daytime TV recently, including talking about "just shielding the over 80's as they are the only ones dying and letting the rest of us live normally" . Well, look at the numbers - around 50% of all deaths are in the 40-80 age bracket. No suggestions on how you would do that obviously.
There is absolutely no doubt that countries who have acted to initially effect a strong lockdown, and followed that with quarantine procedures to prevent re-entrance of infection and swift, decisive action when infection re-appears are currently way better off than those who have dragged their feet every time measures are needed.

I get it. People are really suffering now, both with and without the disease and wishing there was a better way. I do think that had this disease been awkward and a vaccine was going to take much longer then we would be faced with some very tough decisions and strategy may have been different. You must get business (small business's in particular) and the economy working again at some point or we all suffer more (eventually). But it happens that Covid 19 is not a particularly difficult one to create a vaccine for (it's all relative of course). I have heard it described by the people who first characterized it in the West as "clumsy". I have known since about June that we would have a vaccine deployed around end of November - beginning of December. In fact if the FDA hadn't been so worried about US public opinion on vaccines the AZ vaccine would have been with us before the Pfizer vaccine. If I knew that then the government knew that, so that's had a big bearing on strategy so far.

There will be other global pandemics of this nature, it's inevitable, but if we do not learn the lessons of what worked and what didn't and if we listen to those who think there is a radical approach that we didn't try that would have worked brilliantly (herd immunity, selective shielding etc) then we will have a disaster of even greater proportions than we have now. This isn't the first pandemic we've had and it's not the first highly infectious disease to spread through a region of the world. There are people who study this stuff and are "experts" in what works and what doesn't. We should listen to them.


An interesting post - this issue is so many experts with very differing opinions - who is right? Ferguson is an interesting expert - never got a prediction even close.

You quote 50% between - my understanding is 80%+ of the death are occurring in the over 75's

Are we saying those that have had the virus also have a degree of protection - we have c3.5m positive cases so if you add that to the 4m already vaccinated that should give c8m with a degree of protection. If the current continues at c40k a day you will have c5m positives plus 16.5m vaccinated that is c22m if you take off the c10m under 15's you should have 40% of the population with some form of protection by mid Feb?

The problem is now even with a vaccine there doesn't seem to be clarity about what they can achieve - do they stop the spread - doesn't appear so - does it stop people getting ill - doesn't appear so - it will prevent the most vulnerable from death if they get it. Does this really offer a way back to normality? I will definitely have the jab I am not in denial.

The government keep changing the goal posts about removing restrictions - first it was R number, then it was pressure on the NHS, then it was number of infections, then was the vaccine role out - there is surely a limit as to how long this can continue without the medicine being worse than the illness? What are the chances of schools going back before Easter?
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests

Quick Reply



Subject:
Message:

   
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.

Return to The Sin Bin


POSTSONLINEMEMBERSRECORDTEAM
5,168,11380178,6216,308LOGIN
LOGIN HERE
or REGISTER for more features!.
When you register you get access to the live match scores, live match chat and you can post in the discussions on the forums.
YOU HAVE RL CHAT OFF
RLFANS Match Centre
Mon 14th Jun
NRL RND: 14 Canterbury28-6St.George
Sun 13th Jun
WSL RND: 5 Hudds W8-44Wire W
NRL RND: 14 NZ Warriors16-42Melbourne
NRL RND: 14 Parramatta40-12Wests
CH RND: 9 Dewsbury12-56Toulouse
CH RND: 9 Featherstone44-0Bradford
CH RND: 9 Halifax30-6York
CH RND: 9 Swinton30-36Newcastle
CH RND: 9 Whitehaven20-24Batley
CH RND: 9 Widnes22-24LondonB
L1 RND: 6 Coventry12-30Workington
L1 RND: 6 Keighley70-12West Wales
L1 RND: 6 Crusaders0-68Doncaster
Sat 12th Jun
SL RND: 9 Leigh30-36Catalans
NRL RND: 14 Gold Coast34-35Sydney
NRL RND: 14 Souths24-10Newcastle
NRL RND: 14 Canberra38-16Brisbane
CH RND: 9 Oldham28-32Sheffield
L1 RND: 6 Barrow40-4Rochdale
L1 RND: 6 LondonS10-62Hunslet
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
National Rugby League 2021 ROUND : 14
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Melbourne 14 472 178 294 24
Penrith 14 418 133 285 24
Parramatta 14 400 224 176 22
Souths 13 341 282 59 20
Sydney 13 379 223 156 18
Manly 13 315 282 33 14
 
St.George 14 299 312 -13 12
NQL Cowboys 13 264 383 -119 12
Cronulla 13 244 298 -54 10
Gold Coast 14 318 380 -62 10
Canberra 13 257 321 -64 10
NZ Warriors 13 281 347 -66 10
Wests 14 292 374 -82 10
Newcastle 14 231 366 -135 10
Brisbane 14 232 436 -204 6
Canterbury 13 162 366 -204 4
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Super League XXVI ROUND : 9
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Catalans 9 268 142 126 16 188.73 88.89
St.Helens 8 206 70 136 14 294.29 87.50
Wigan 8 158 136 22 14 116.18 87.50
Warrington 9 302 157 145 13 192.36 72.22
Hull FC 9 179 143 36 11 125.17 61.11
Hull KR 9 223 204 19 10 109.31 55.56
 
Castleford 9 185 232 -47 8 79.74 44.44
Leeds 8 150 136 14 6 110.29 37.50
Huddersfield 8 150 162 -12 6 92.59 37.50
Wakefield 9 163 231 -68 4 70.56 22.22
Salford 9 106 289 -183 2 36.68 11.11
Leigh 9 134 322 -188 0 41.61 0
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Championship 2021 ROUND : 9
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Toulouse 7 347 70 277 14 495.71 100
Featherstone 8 306 76 230 16 402.63 100
Bradford 9 228 216 12 14 105.56 77.78
Batley 8 228 160 68 12 142.50 75
LondonB 9 226 216 10 11 104.63 61.11
Halifax 9 271 135 136 10 200.74 55.56
 
York 9 219 180 39 8 121.67 44.44
Sheffield 9 211 249 -38 8 84.74 44.44
Widnes 9 226 263 -37 7 85.93 38.89
Dewsbury 8 115 227 -112 6 50.66 37.50
Newcastle 8 168 246 -78 5 68.29 31.25
Whitehaven 9 160 278 -118 5 57.55 27.78
Oldham 9 134 330 -196 4 40.61 22.22
Swinton 9 152 345 -193 0 44.06 0
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred League One 2021 ROUND : 5
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Barrow 5 211 62 149 10 340.32 100
Workington 5 180 94 86 8 191.49 80
Doncaster 5 182 126 56 8 144.44 80
Coventry 4 106 114 -8 4 92.98 50
Keighley 5 158 135 23 4 117.04 40
Rochdale 5 157 156 1 4 100.64 40
 
Crusaders 5 122 150 -28 4 81.33 40
Hunslet 5 84 137 -53 4 61.31 40
LondonS 4 104 150 -46 2 69.33 25
West Wales 5 70 250 -180 0 28 0
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Womens Super League 2021 ROUND : 5
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
St.HelensW 3 230 6 224 6 3,833.33 100
LeedsW 3 214 22 192 6 972.73 100
WiganW 3 158 18 140 6 877.78 100
CastlefordW 3 104 24 80 6 433.33 100
YorkW 3 76 102 -26 2 74.51 33.33
Wire W 4 86 154 -68 2 55.84 25
 
FeatherstoneW 4 74 164 -90 2 45.12 25
BradfordW 4 60 180 -120 2 33.33 25
Hudds W 4 46 222 -176 2 20.72 25
WakefieldW 3 16 172 -156 0 9.30 0
RLFANS Recent Posts




X