This news article

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article262129007.html

shows why it was indeed extremely serious, and yet it was
possible for some people not to perceive this fact.

John Savard

Quadibloc wrote:
> This news article
>
> https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article262129007.html
>
> shows why it was indeed extremely serious, and yet it was
> possible for some people not to perceive this fact.

A short note that, no, I see no way to draw such information from the article.

In fact, there is a flaw in the story. I don't know if it is bad reporting, or if the
researchers are attempting to lie with statistics. Which, I guess, makes it
bad reporting by itself.

--
-Jack

On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 5:16:24 AM UTC-6, jack....@gmail.com wrote:

> A short note that, no, I see no way to draw such information from the article.

What the article noted was that the pandemic was a lot worse for *some* people
than for others.

From that, one can indeed draw the conclusion that those who were lucky
enough to be able to work from home, and emerge largely unscathed, could
get the idea that it wasn't as deadly, and the chances of falling prey to
COVID-19 weren't as high... as they were for the working-class people who
had to do jobs that brought them into contact with others, even before there
was a vaccine, even before we had adequate supplies of masks for anyone
except health workers.

Of course, the chances for everyone, on average, _aren't_ as high as they
are for the people facing the greatest risk.

But if laws and public policy are decided by the elites at the least risk...
(which pretty much is a given that can't be helped) and they're deciding
them based on the perspective of their own situation... (which is what
_can_ be avoided) instead of being decided on the basis of the situation
of the people at the greatest risk... then they're being decided the wrong
way. At least, in my opinion - but I think that's also a fact which should
be the opinion of any decent human being with a conscience.

John Savard

On Sun, 05 Jun 2022 03:09:24 -0700, Quadibloc wrote:

> This news article
>
> https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article262129007.html
>
> shows why it was indeed extremely serious, and yet it was possible for
> some people not to perceive this fact.
>
> John Savard

It was quite possible to perceive that the pandemic was less
serious than the news media made it out to be. People were dying
of other stuff too, as they usually do. The key factor in
perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.

On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:

> The key factor in
> perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.

Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.

It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
referenced explained.

John Savard

On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>
> > The key factor in
> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
>
> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
> referenced explained.

I present, again, this chart:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.

Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
states, and some cities.

The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.

pt

In article <58078641-eca8-4e78-9830-095a01346617n@googlegroups.com>,
pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>>
>> > The key factor in
>> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
>> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
>>
>> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
>> referenced explained.
>
>I present, again, this chart:
>
>https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
>
>It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
>Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
>April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
>
>Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
>there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
>states, and some cities.
>
>The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
>the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
>that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.

But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?

--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
> In article <58078641-eca8-4e78...@googlegroups.com>,
> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> >> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
> >>
> >> > The key factor in
> >> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
> >> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
> >>
> >> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
> >> referenced explained.
> >
> >I present, again, this chart:
> >
> >https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
> >
> >It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
> >Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
> >April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
> >
> >Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
> >there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
> >states, and some cities.
> >
> >The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
> >the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
> >that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.

> But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
> 45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
> that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
> money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?

It's not like you to don the tinfoil hat. :-)

Both the US and Canada have problems with the 'healthy litter of kids' thing,
but Canada seems to be worse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States

pt

In article <1c653275-1bac-46e2-83a2-38779a2a2301n@googlegroups.com>,
pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>> In article <58078641-eca8-4e78...@googlegroups.com>,
>> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>> >> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > The key factor in
>> >> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
>> >> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
>> >>
>> >> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
>> >> referenced explained.
>> >
>> >I present, again, this chart:
>> >
>> >https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
>> >
>> >It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
>> >Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
>> >April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
>> >
>> >Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
>> >there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
>> >states, and some cities.
>> >
>> >The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
>> >the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
>> >that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.
>
>> But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
>> 45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
>> that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
>> money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?
>
>It's not like you to don the tinfoil hat. :-)
>
>Both the US and Canada have problems with the 'healthy litter of kids' thing,
>but Canada seems to be worse.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States

Canada has outsourced the production of new Canadians to nations like
India and China, which works fine at the moment but has at least two
major failure modes:

1: Xenophobic Canadians getting enough power to reduce or stop immigration

2: A decline in the supply people who particularly want to freeze their
ass off in Canada.

1 Eg: Quebec's dilemma between maintaining their share of the national population
and maintaining that most central Quebec value, loathing non-pure wool people.

2: Could fail if Canada becomes a less attractive place to live in, either
absolutely or relatively or if the global demographic transition bites hard
enough counties stop letting people leave.

--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:36:14 AM UTC-5, James Nicoll wrote:
> In article <1c653275-1bac-46e2...@googlegroups.com>,
> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
> >> In article <58078641-eca8-4e78...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> >> >> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > The key factor in
> >> >> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
> >> >> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
> >> >>
> >> >> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
> >> >> referenced explained.
> >> >
> >> >I present, again, this chart:
> >> >
> >> >https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
> >> >
> >> >It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
> >> >Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
> >> >April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
> >> >
> >> >Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
> >> >there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
> >> >states, and some cities.
> >> >
> >> >The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
> >> >the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
> >> >that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.
> >
> >> But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
> >> 45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
> >> that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
> >> money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?
> >
> >It's not like you to don the tinfoil hat. :-)
> >
> >Both the US and Canada have problems with the 'healthy litter of kids' thing,
> >but Canada seems to be worse.
> >
> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada
> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
> Canada has outsourced the production of new Canadians to nations like
> India and China, which works fine at the moment but has at least two
> major failure modes:
>
> 1: Xenophobic Canadians getting enough power to reduce or stop immigration
>
> 2: A decline in the supply people who particularly want to freeze their
> ass off in Canada.

People from Somalia live in Minnesota. Here in Michigan I have met plenty of people from Uganda, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Nigeria and Haiti. That problem may not be as severe as it sounds.

In article <e1c085f0-4cfe-4c08-9b73-43c7e03aa4fdn@googlegroups.com>,
artyw2@yahoo.com <artyw2@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:36:14 AM UTC-5, James Nicoll wrote:
>> In article <1c653275-1bac-46e2...@googlegroups.com>,
>> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>> >> In article <58078641-eca8-4e78...@googlegroups.com>,
>> >> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>> >> >> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > The key factor in
>> >> >> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
>> >> >> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
>> >> >> referenced explained.
>> >> >
>> >> >I present, again, this chart:
>> >> >
>> >> >https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
>> >> >
>> >> >It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
>> >> >Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
>> >> >April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
>> >> >
>> >> >Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
>> >> >there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
>> >> >states, and some cities.
>> >> >
>> >> >The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
>> >> >the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
>> >> >that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.
>> >
>> >> But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
>> >> 45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
>> >> that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
>> >> money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?
>> >
>> >It's not like you to don the tinfoil hat. :-)
>> >
>> >Both the US and Canada have problems with the 'healthy litter of kids' thing,
>> >but Canada seems to be worse.
>> >
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
>> Canada has outsourced the production of new Canadians to nations like
>> India and China, which works fine at the moment but has at least two
>> major failure modes:
>>
>> 1: Xenophobic Canadians getting enough power to reduce or stop immigration
>>
>> 2: A decline in the supply people who particularly want to freeze their
>> ass off in Canada.
>
>People from Somalia live in Minnesota. Here in Michigan I have met plenty of
>people from Uganda, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Nigeria and Haiti. That problem may not
>be as severe as it sounds.

Right now, Canada is attractive enough economically and politically to
compensate for our shitty climate. That could change.

One pleasant spring day, I was waiting in t-shirt and shorts for a bus,
and noticed an unfortunate Middle Eastern woman (maybe one of our Syrian
refugees) bundled up in a parka, looking absolutely miserable...
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 10:36:14 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
> In article <1c653275-1bac-46e2...@googlegroups.com>,
> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
> >> In article <58078641-eca8-4e78...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> >> >> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > The key factor in
> >> >> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
> >> >> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
> >> >>
> >> >> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
> >> >> referenced explained.
> >> >
> >> >I present, again, this chart:
> >> >
> >> >https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
> >> >
> >> >It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
> >> >Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
> >> >April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
> >> >
> >> >Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
> >> >there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
> >> >states, and some cities.
> >> >
> >> >The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
> >> >the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
> >> >that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.
> >
> >> But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
> >> 45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
> >> that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
> >> money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?
> >
> >It's not like you to don the tinfoil hat. :-)
> >
> >Both the US and Canada have problems with the 'healthy litter of kids' thing,
> >but Canada seems to be worse.
> >
> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada
> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
> Canada has outsourced the production of new Canadians to nations like
> India and China, which works fine at the moment but has at least two
> major failure modes:
>
> 1: Xenophobic Canadians getting enough power to reduce or stop immigration
>
> 2: A decline in the supply people who particularly want to freeze their
> ass off in Canada.

Don't count on China. They're in deep doodoo, demographically speaking:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#/media/File:China_population_sex_by_age_on_Nov,_1st,_2020.png
and getting worse.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#/media/File:China_population_pyramid_projected_for_2030.png

India's better, but the young population is no longer increasing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_India
(note the excess males)
> 1 Eg: Quebec's dilemma between maintaining their share of the national population
> and maintaining that most central Quebec value, loathing non-pure wool people.
>
> 2: Could fail if Canada becomes a less attractive place to live in, either
> absolutely or relatively or if the global demographic transition bites hard
> enough counties stop letting people leave.

Global warming may help you here.

pt

In article <8b38e242-c630-47dd-84d6-79bd75afe72en@googlegroups.com>,
pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 10:36:14 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>> In article <1c653275-1bac-46e2...@googlegroups.com>,
>> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>> >> In article <58078641-eca8-4e78...@googlegroups.com>,
>> >> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>> >> >> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > The key factor in
>> >> >> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
>> >> >> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
>> >> >> referenced explained.
>> >> >
>> >> >I present, again, this chart:
>> >> >
>> >> >https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
>> >> >
>> >> >It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
>> >> >Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
>> >> >April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
>> >> >
>> >> >Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
>> >> >there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
>> >> >states, and some cities.
>> >> >
>> >> >The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
>> >> >the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
>> >> >that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.
>> >
>> >> But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
>> >> 45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
>> >> that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
>> >> money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?
>> >
>> >It's not like you to don the tinfoil hat. :-)
>> >
>> >Both the US and Canada have problems with the 'healthy litter of kids' thing,
>> >but Canada seems to be worse.
>> >
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
>> Canada has outsourced the production of new Canadians to nations like
>> India and China, which works fine at the moment but has at least two
>> major failure modes:
>>
>> 1: Xenophobic Canadians getting enough power to reduce or stop immigration
>>
>> 2: A decline in the supply people who particularly want to freeze their
>> ass off in Canada.
>
>Don't count on China. They're in deep doodoo, demographically speaking:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#/media/File:China_population_sex_by_age_on_Nov,_1st,_2020.png
>and getting worse.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#/media/File:China_population_pyramid_projected_for_2030.png
>
>India's better, but the young population is no longer increasing.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_India
>(note the excess males)

Yeah, I expect a pivot to obtaining new Canadians from Africa, whose nations
still have positive TFRs.

>> 1 Eg: Quebec's dilemma between maintaining their share of the national population
>> and maintaining that most central Quebec value, loathing non-pure wool people.
>>
>> 2: Could fail if Canada becomes a less attractive place to live in, either
>> absolutely or relatively or if the global demographic transition bites hard
>> enough counties stop letting people leave.
>
>Global warming may help you here.

Except Canada is right next door to the US, vast swathes of which will
become much less habitable. For reasons that escape me, our national
policy seems to be hopeful optimism about US intentions, rather than
the more prudent option of acquiring enough nuclear weapons to resurface
the planet.

--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On 2022-06-06 1:04 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Jun 2022 03:09:24 -0700, Quadibloc wrote:
>
>> This news article
>>
>> https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article262129007.html
>>
>> shows why it was indeed extremely serious, and yet it was possible for
>> some people not to perceive this fact.
>>
>> John Savard
>
> It was quite possible to perceive that the pandemic was less
> serious than the news media made it out to be. People were dying
> of other stuff too, as they usually do. The key factor in
> perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.

"People were dying of other stuff too, as they usually do."

Seriously?

In article <t7l78o$io9$1@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>On 2022-06-06 1:04 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Jun 2022 03:09:24 -0700, Quadibloc wrote:
>>
>>> This news article
>>>
>>> https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article262129007.html
>>>
>>> shows why it was indeed extremely serious, and yet it was possible for
>>> some people not to perceive this fact.
>>>
>>> John Savard
>>
>> It was quite possible to perceive that the pandemic was less
>> serious than the news media made it out to be. People were dying
>> of other stuff too, as they usually do. The key factor in
>> perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
>
>
>"People were dying of other stuff too, as they usually do."
>
>Seriously?

I find myself very interested in the implication of "usually" that
there are people who don't die.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On 06/06/2022 08.21, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>>
>>> The key factor in
>>> perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
>> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
>>
>> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
>> referenced explained.
>
> I present, again, this chart:
>
> https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
>
> It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
> Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
> April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.

2020, not 2019.

--
Michael F. Stemper
Economists have correctly predicted seven of the last three recessions.

On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:55:50 PM UTC-4, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
> On 06/06/2022 08.21, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> >> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
> >>
> >>> The key factor in
> >>> perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
> >> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
> >>
> >> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
> >> referenced explained.
> >
> > I present, again, this chart:
> >
> > https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
> >
> > It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
> > Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
> > April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
> 2020, not 2019.

Yeah, I brainfarted on that. But it doesn't invalidate my point: The chart makes
it clear that this wasn't 'just the flu'. A lot of extra deaths occurred, correlated with
spikes in Covid.

pt

On 7/06/22 03:28, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 10:36:14 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>> In article <1c653275-1bac-46e2...@googlegroups.com>,
>> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>>>> In article <58078641-eca8-4e78...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The key factor in
>>>>>>> perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
>>>>>> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
>>>>>> referenced explained.
>>>>>
>>>>> I present, again, this chart:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
>>>>> Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
>>>>> April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
>>>>> there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
>>>>> states, and some cities.
>>>>>
>>>>> The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
>>>>> the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
>>>>> that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.
>>>
>>>> But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
>>>> 45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
>>>> that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
>>>> money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?
>>>
>>> It's not like you to don the tinfoil hat. :-)
>>>
>>> Both the US and Canada have problems with the 'healthy litter of kids' thing,
>>> but Canada seems to be worse.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
>> Canada has outsourced the production of new Canadians to nations like
>> India and China, which works fine at the moment but has at least two
>> major failure modes:
>>
>> 1: Xenophobic Canadians getting enough power to reduce or stop immigration
>>
>> 2: A decline in the supply people who particularly want to freeze their
>> ass off in Canada.
>
snip
> Global warming may help you here.
>
> pt

I was considering saying something similar. It is now winter here in
Aotearoa further away from the South Pole then Canada from the North but
daytime temperatures are early summer figures. I am amazed at the
difference from only two years ago.

On Sun, 5 Jun 2022 09:19:22 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
wrote:

>On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 5:16:24 AM UTC-6, jack....@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> A short note that, no, I see no way to draw such information from the article.
>
>What the article noted was that the pandemic was a lot worse for *some* people
>than for others.
>
>From that, one can indeed draw the conclusion that those who were lucky
>enough to be able to work from home, and emerge largely unscathed, could
>get the idea that it wasn't as deadly, and the chances of falling prey to
>COVID-19 weren't as high... as they were for the working-class people who
>had to do jobs that brought them into contact with others, even before there
>was a vaccine, even before we had adequate supplies of masks for anyone
>except health workers.
>
>Of course, the chances for everyone, on average, _aren't_ as high as they
>are for the people facing the greatest risk.
>
>But if laws and public policy are decided by the elites at the least risk...
>(which pretty much is a given that can't be helped) and they're deciding
>them based on the perspective of their own situation... (which is what
>_can_ be avoided) instead of being decided on the basis of the situation
>of the people at the greatest risk... then they're being decided the wrong
>way. At least, in my opinion - but I think that's also a fact which should
>be the opinion of any decent human being with a conscience.

At this point just about everybody I know has had COVID and most found
it to be a minor annoyance. I am not sure whether I have--I had
_something_ shortly after exposure to a recent returnee from China but
it was before knowledge of COVID was widespread.

Note that I'm a geezer, thus theoretically high-risk. My neighbor is
a decade older than I am, and when he had it the only treatment he
took was Tylenol.

When you look at numbers as numbers they seem frighteningly large.
When you look at them as percentages though, the percentage who die
from it is not huge.

On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 07:46:09 -0700 (PDT), "artyw2@yahoo.com"
<artyw2@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:36:14 AM UTC-5, James Nicoll wrote:
>> In article <1c653275-1bac-46e2...@googlegroups.com>,
>> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>> >> In article <58078641-eca8-4e78...@googlegroups.com>,
>> >> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>> >> >> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > The key factor in
>> >> >> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
>> >> >> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
>> >> >> referenced explained.
>> >> >
>> >> >I present, again, this chart:
>> >> >
>> >> >https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
>> >> >
>> >> >It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
>> >> >Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
>> >> >April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
>> >> >
>> >> >Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
>> >> >there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
>> >> >states, and some cities.
>> >> >
>> >> >The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
>> >> >the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
>> >> >that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.
>> >
>> >> But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
>> >> 45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
>> >> that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
>> >> money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?
>> >
>> >It's not like you to don the tinfoil hat. :-)
>> >
>> >Both the US and Canada have problems with the 'healthy litter of kids' thing,
>> >but Canada seems to be worse.
>> >
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
>> Canada has outsourced the production of new Canadians to nations like
>> India and China, which works fine at the moment but has at least two
>> major failure modes:
>>
>> 1: Xenophobic Canadians getting enough power to reduce or stop immigration
>>
>> 2: A decline in the supply people who particularly want to freeze their
>> ass off in Canada.
>
>People from Somalia live in Minnesota. Here in Michigan I have met plenty of people from Uganda, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Nigeria and Haiti. That problem may not be as severe as it sounds.

And in CT my new neighbor across the street is a very nice fellow from
Nigeria.

On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 14:51:03 -0000 (UTC), jdnicoll@panix.com (James
Nicoll) wrote:

>In article <e1c085f0-4cfe-4c08-9b73-43c7e03aa4fdn@googlegroups.com>,
>artyw2@yahoo.com <artyw2@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:36:14 AM UTC-5, James Nicoll wrote:
>>> In article <1c653275-1bac-46e2...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>>> >> In article <58078641-eca8-4e78...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> >> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>>> >> >> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> > The key factor in
>>> >> >> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
>>> >> >> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
>>> >> >> referenced explained.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >I present, again, this chart:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
>>> >> >
>>> >> >It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
>>> >> >Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
>>> >> >April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
>>> >> >there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
>>> >> >states, and some cities.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
>>> >> >the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
>>> >> >that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.
>>> >
>>> >> But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
>>> >> 45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
>>> >> that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
>>> >> money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?
>>> >
>>> >It's not like you to don the tinfoil hat. :-)
>>> >
>>> >Both the US and Canada have problems with the 'healthy litter of kids' thing,
>>> >but Canada seems to be worse.
>>> >
>>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada
>>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
>>> Canada has outsourced the production of new Canadians to nations like
>>> India and China, which works fine at the moment but has at least two
>>> major failure modes:
>>>
>>> 1: Xenophobic Canadians getting enough power to reduce or stop immigration
>>>
>>> 2: A decline in the supply people who particularly want to freeze their
>>> ass off in Canada.
>>
>>People from Somalia live in Minnesota. Here in Michigan I have met plenty of
>>people from Uganda, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Nigeria and Haiti. That problem may not
>>be as severe as it sounds.
>
>Right now, Canada is attractive enough economically and politically to
>compensate for our shitty climate. That could change.
>
>One pleasant spring day, I was waiting in t-shirt and shorts for a bus,
>and noticed an unfortunate Middle Eastern woman (maybe one of our Syrian
>refugees) bundled up in a parka, looking absolutely miserable...

This may be a matter of acclimatization. Visiting Minnesota on
business, I was bundled up in a Main Warden Parka and I was cold. On
the other hand the people I was working with were outdoors in short
sleeves in a snowstorm. And I had been living in CT for several years
before that, having grown up in north Florida.

OTOH, I'm of English and Irish descent--the Minnesotans based on their
names were of Scandinavian descent.

On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 08:28:36 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 10:36:14 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>> In article <1c653275-1bac-46e2...@googlegroups.com>,
>> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>> >> In article <58078641-eca8-4e78...@googlegroups.com>,
>> >> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>> >> >> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > The key factor in
>> >> >> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
>> >> >> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
>> >> >> referenced explained.
>> >> >
>> >> >I present, again, this chart:
>> >> >
>> >> >https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
>> >> >
>> >> >It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
>> >> >Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
>> >> >April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
>> >> >
>> >> >Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
>> >> >there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
>> >> >states, and some cities.
>> >> >
>> >> >The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
>> >> >the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
>> >> >that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.
>> >
>> >> But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
>> >> 45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
>> >> that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
>> >> money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?
>> >
>> >It's not like you to don the tinfoil hat. :-)
>> >
>> >Both the US and Canada have problems with the 'healthy litter of kids' thing,
>> >but Canada seems to be worse.
>> >
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
>> Canada has outsourced the production of new Canadians to nations like
>> India and China, which works fine at the moment but has at least two
>> major failure modes:
>>
>> 1: Xenophobic Canadians getting enough power to reduce or stop immigration
>>
>> 2: A decline in the supply people who particularly want to freeze their
>> ass off in Canada.
>
>Don't count on China. They're in deep doodoo, demographically speaking:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#/media/File:China_population_sex_by_age_on_Nov,_1st,_2020.png
>and getting worse.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#/media/File:China_population_pyramid_projected_for_2030.png
>
>India's better, but the young population is no longer increasing.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_India
>(note the excess males)

Climatologically speaking, this is a good thing. But nobody has
figured out how to sustain an economy with declining markets.
>> 1 Eg: Quebec's dilemma between maintaining their share of the national population
>> and maintaining that most central Quebec value, loathing non-pure wool people.
>>
>> 2: Could fail if Canada becomes a less attractive place to live in, either
>> absolutely or relatively or if the global demographic transition bites hard
>> enough counties stop letting people leave.
>
>Global warming may help you here.

Yep. Although it would be a shame to see the Canadian forests cleared
to produce farmland.

On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 15:40:55 -0000 (UTC), jdnicoll@panix.com (James
Nicoll) wrote:

>In article <8b38e242-c630-47dd-84d6-79bd75afe72en@googlegroups.com>,
>pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 10:36:14 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>>> In article <1c653275-1bac-46e2...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
>>> >> In article <58078641-eca8-4e78...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> >> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 5:28:11 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>>> >> >> On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 2:05:02 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> > The key factor in
>>> >> >> > perception is the excess death rate of one's own social circle.
>>> >> >> Yes. That is a way that people tend to think.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> It is a faulty way to think that leads to error, as the article I
>>> >> >> referenced explained.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >I present, again, this chart:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
>>> >> >
>>> >> >It's the total number of deaths in the US, each week, from *all* causes.
>>> >> >Its immediately apparent that things went badly off the rails from early
>>> >> >April 2019, and there have been several waves of excess deaths.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >Ignore the red and orange lines - they don't tell you much. Also note
>>> >> >there's a 'Select jurisdiction' pulldown at the top that lets you select
>>> >> >states, and some cities.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >The nice thing about this chart is that its hard to argue with it - counting
>>> >> >the total number of dead people in a week is not subject to the sort of biases
>>> >> >that let denialists claim Covid deaths are overcounted.
>>> >
>>> >> But if you adjust for the fact middle and lower class lifespans in excess of
>>> >> 45 years do American oligarches no particular good, the numbers don't look
>>> >> that bad. By 45 a peon can produce a healthy litter of kids and put enough
>>> >> money into the pension fund to be worth stealing. Who needs them after that?
>>> >
>>> >It's not like you to don the tinfoil hat. :-)
>>> >
>>> >Both the US and Canada have problems with the 'healthy litter of kids' thing,
>>> >but Canada seems to be worse.
>>> >
>>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada
>>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
>>> Canada has outsourced the production of new Canadians to nations like
>>> India and China, which works fine at the moment but has at least two
>>> major failure modes:
>>>
>>> 1: Xenophobic Canadians getting enough power to reduce or stop immigration
>>>
>>> 2: A decline in the supply people who particularly want to freeze their
>>> ass off in Canada.
>>
>>Don't count on China. They're in deep doodoo, demographically speaking:
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#/media/File:China_population_sex_by_age_on_Nov,_1st,_2020.png
>>and getting worse.
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#/media/File:China_population_pyramid_projected_for_2030.png
>>
>>India's better, but the young population is no longer increasing.
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_India
>>(note the excess males)
>
>Yeah, I expect a pivot to obtaining new Canadians from Africa, whose nations
>still have positive TFRs.
>
>>> 1 Eg: Quebec's dilemma between maintaining their share of the national population
>>> and maintaining that most central Quebec value, loathing non-pure wool people.
>>>
>>> 2: Could fail if Canada becomes a less attractive place to live in, either
>>> absolutely or relatively or if the global demographic transition bites hard
>>> enough counties stop letting people leave.
>>
>>Global warming may help you here.
>
>Except Canada is right next door to the US, vast swathes of which will
>become much less habitable.

_Will_ become or _might_ become?

The notion that global warming will render parts of the US
uninhabitable is speculation.

>For reasons that escape me, our national
>policy seems to be hopeful optimism about US intentions, rather than
>the more prudent option of acquiring enough nuclear weapons to resurface
>the planet.

What, you expect the US to invade Canada?

On 2022-06-06 11:15 p.m., J. Clarke wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Jun 2022 09:19:22 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 5:16:24 AM UTC-6, jack....@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> A short note that, no, I see no way to draw such information from the article.
>>
>> What the article noted was that the pandemic was a lot worse for *some* people
>> than for others.
>>
>>From that, one can indeed draw the conclusion that those who were lucky
>> enough to be able to work from home, and emerge largely unscathed, could
>> get the idea that it wasn't as deadly, and the chances of falling prey to
>> COVID-19 weren't as high... as they were for the working-class people who
>> had to do jobs that brought them into contact with others, even before there
>> was a vaccine, even before we had adequate supplies of masks for anyone
>> except health workers.
>>
>> Of course, the chances for everyone, on average, _aren't_ as high as they
>> are for the people facing the greatest risk.
>>
>> But if laws and public policy are decided by the elites at the least risk...
>> (which pretty much is a given that can't be helped) and they're deciding
>> them based on the perspective of their own situation... (which is what
>> _can_ be avoided) instead of being decided on the basis of the situation
>> of the people at the greatest risk... then they're being decided the wrong
>> way. At least, in my opinion - but I think that's also a fact which should
>> be the opinion of any decent human being with a conscience.
>
> At this point just about everybody I know has had COVID and most found
> it to be a minor annoyance. I am not sure whether I have--I had
> _something_ shortly after exposure to a recent returnee from China but
> it was before knowledge of COVID was widespread.
>
> Note that I'm a geezer, thus theoretically high-risk. My neighbor is
> a decade older than I am, and when he had it the only treatment he
> took was Tylenol.
>
> When you look at numbers as numbers they seem frighteningly large.
> When you look at them as percentages though, the percentage who die
> from it is not huge.
>

Well that's OK then...

....all the extra people who died because your government didn't want to
take it seriously will be so relieved to hear that.

On Tuesday, 7 June 2022 at 07:15:50 UTC+1, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Jun 2022 09:19:22 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
> wrote:
> >On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 5:16:24 AM UTC-6, jack....@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >> A short note that, no, I see no way to draw such information from the article.
> >
> >What the article noted was that the pandemic was a lot worse for *some* people
> >than for others.
> >
> >From that, one can indeed draw the conclusion that those who were lucky
> >enough to be able to work from home, and emerge largely unscathed, could
> >get the idea that it wasn't as deadly, and the chances of falling prey to
> >COVID-19 weren't as high... as they were for the working-class people who
> >had to do jobs that brought them into contact with others, even before there
> >was a vaccine, even before we had adequate supplies of masks for anyone
> >except health workers.
> >
> >Of course, the chances for everyone, on average, _aren't_ as high as they
> >are for the people facing the greatest risk.
> >
> >But if laws and public policy are decided by the elites at the least risk...
> >(which pretty much is a given that can't be helped) and they're deciding
> >them based on the perspective of their own situation... (which is what
> >_can_ be avoided) instead of being decided on the basis of the situation
> >of the people at the greatest risk... then they're being decided the wrong
> >way. At least, in my opinion - but I think that's also a fact which should
> >be the opinion of any decent human being with a conscience.
> At this point just about everybody I know has had COVID and most found
> it to be a minor annoyance. I am not sure whether I have--I had
> _something_ shortly after exposure to a recent returnee from China but
> it was before knowledge of COVID was widespread.
>
> Note that I'm a geezer, thus theoretically high-risk. My neighbor is
> a decade older than I am, and when he had it the only treatment he
> took was Tylenol.
>
> When you look at numbers as numbers they seem frighteningly large.
> When you look at them as percentages though, the percentage who die
> from it is not huge.

But when terrorists kill just a few thousand people,
what a fuss. Also, is there anyone you're not counting
as "more than minorly annoyed" because they died,
and so they cannot comment?