posted March 14, 2020 12:53 AM            

There is just so much I could say but I will just stay on 2 subjects

You say you " do wish people cared about other people more than money". I do too, but guess what, it takes MONEY to care for sick people. It takes a lot of money to pay the health workers, the medications, the procedures, the labs and imaging, the hospitals. In a strong economy, these things are no big deal, but in a crippled economy, where will the money come from? So it is in the best interest of those most vulnerable that the economy stay strong so that needed money can continue to be diverted to care for them.

You took offense at my mention of quarantine, as though I was talking about putting people in concentration camps. Heads up, quarantine has been standard for people who have tested positive for corona virus. And people who have been exposed to someone who is infected are doing SELF QUARANTINE. So why is quarantine an offensive word all of a sudden? I was just asking, how about quarantining those AT RISKS, FOR THEIR OWN SAKE, instead of quarantining whole populations who themselves are not at risk?

posted March 14, 2020 01:02 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belage:

You took offense at my mention of quarantine, as though I was talking about putting people in concentration camps. Heads up, quarantine has been standard for people who have tested positive for corona virus. And people who have been exposed to someone who is infected are doing SELF QUARANTINE. So why is quarantine an offensive word all of a sudden? I was just asking, how about quarantining those AT RISKS, FOR THEIR OWN SAKE, instead of quarantining whole populations who themselves are not at risk?

If that angers you, well... I am sorry. But I stand by my question.

---

posted March 14, 2020 01:05 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belage:
@ Hypatia

I am not angry, just a little passionate as I wanted to inject another facet into the debate. I was just using CAPS for emphasis.

---

hahahahaha I mean then passionate!

posted March 14, 2020 01:07 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belage:
@ Hypatia

I am not angry, just a little passionate as I wanted to inject another facet into the debate. I was just using CAPS for emphasis.

---

posted March 14, 2020 07:56 AM            

Asia
Italy
Cruise ship

posted March 14, 2020 04:18 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by teasel:
A friend of mine just posted that xylitol nasal spray will protect you, and also to take CoQ10 (not elderberry). This came from an expert on this kind of thing, apparently.

---

posted March 14, 2020 04:23 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Moonbeth:
Hey love, how are you doing?
I'm required to stay home for the most part because of my spoonie status...

---

I’m okay, thanks. Except that last night, I left the house for the first time all week (dad drove me to a bookstore, even though I wasn’t sure we should go). I made the mistake of mentioning it on Facebook, and someone freaked out, begging people to stay home. I was going crazy at home, that was why dad insisted, since the store was still open.

posted March 14, 2020 06:00 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mystic~Melody:
Schools closing in Illinois. Husband getting “work from home” instructions for employees who feel they are at risk.
What’s going on in your neck of the woods?

---

Well I went out today to the gym and it was actually fuller than usual, when I arrived there was a very wide age range of folks working out, by the time I left a few hours later I swear it was mainly elderly just working out. I mean good for them. I get it, I don't want to live in fear and whatever time I have left whatever it may be, a few months or 40 more years I don't want to be confined to my house worried about everything and not going out. It felt goood to go to the gym, I thought to myself I needed this, I need some things to stay normal and give me that sense of normalcy and felt grateful for that, it was nice to be around people and feel connected to humanity even if we were perhaps been somewhat mindful of space. I think social distancing is good and been mindful about germs and all those precautions is good tooo including storing food that doesnt go bad just in case and over the counter meds but am I going to hide in my house now and never go out? not my style (unless I know I have it and have symptoms ect, then I would stay in, is a must)...I passed by my dog park on my way to the gym and it looked appropriately full for a typical saturday too...

posted March 14, 2020 06:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by teasel:
I’m okay, thanks. Except that last night, I left the house for the first time all week (dad drove me to a bookstore, even though I wasn’t sure we should go). I made the mistake of mentioning it on Facebook, and someone freaked out, begging people to stay home. I was going crazy at home, that was why dad insisted, since the store was still open.

So, I need to see if I can get a few more things, and then try to stay here. At least the weather is getting warmer. I can go outside, in my garden.

---

posted March 14, 2020 09:36 PM            

ADDED:

posted March 14, 2020 11:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belage:
@ Pixie Jane

There is just so much I could say but I will just stay on 2 subjects

You say you " do wish people cared about other people more than money". I do too, but guess what, it takes MONEY to care for sick people. It takes a lot of money to pay the health workers, the medications, the procedures, the labs and imaging, the hospitals. In a strong economy, these things are no big deal, but in a crippled economy, where will the money come from? So it is in the best interest of those most vulnerable that the economy stay strong so that needed money can continue to be diverted to care for them.

You took offense at my mention of quarantine, as though I was talking about putting people in concentration camps. Heads up, quarantine has been standard for people who have tested positive for corona virus. And people who have been exposed to someone who is infected are doing SELF QUARANTINE. So why is quarantine an offensive word all of a sudden? I was just asking, how about quarantining those AT RISKS, FOR THEIR OWN SAKE, instead of quarantining whole populations who themselves are not at risk?

If that angers you, well... I am sorry. But I stand by my question.

---

Locking people in their own homes for people already lonely and can't normally order everything to their homes because of a disease not anywhere as serious as people make it out to be is not a viable solution.

And it's catastrophizing, that is, people are imagining worse case scenarios and in some cases willing to impose suffering on others for their own well being when it's unnecessary and even counterproductive.

This isn't the apocalypse. This isn't Captain Trips from The Stand. It's people overreacting to clickbait articles and politicians wanting to be seen as taking a strong stance (whether it blows up in their face or not is yet to be seen, but I hope it does). Humanity is prone to hysteria and it's a trait that needs to be combated, and is far worse than even swine flu (which also killed children), which in turn was far worse than the current virus.

The economy you value knows how profitable fear and anger is, and so they spread it. I'm convinced that part of the reason that the most vulnerable aren't as in hysterics over this is because they're not constantly checking their phones for clickbait news (and though some never learn, some of us see patterns keep repeating, and this is a pattern I've seen before, though the overreaction to something that is almost trivial is disturbing).

Wall street companies make it, we keep falling for it. If our economy suffers for it, I just see it as a karmic lesson. And going by the panicked runs on the stores I say it's more than making up for the money lost. It seems to me that public services (libraries, schools, etc) are at the most risk rather than Wall Street anyway.

Deciding that a disease that isn't THAT serious means people need to be locked away and isolated because they're at risk (especially if locked up with others) is not only counterproductive economically and in terms of dealing with it, but it's unnecessary. It's learning the wrong lessons.

Old people are also customers who contribute to the economy (I'm curious how the economy will inevitably change after the last Boomer dies) and dismissing them as old and sick anyway (when many aren't sick, though their immune systems may be compromised from past illnesses) was incredibly callous. And it's just yet another overreaction to something that isn't that serious (well the reaction may be serious, but not the virus).

I don't recall your talking about only the sick being quarantined, but the most vulnerable so that everyone else can do well (due to how posts can be easily changed without any indication of it having been changed, something a few here have taken a lot of advantage of, I won't go back and look, just say it was my perception at the time), and it sounded as if you were willing for more drastic measures, like quarantining in facilities, which would be "concentration camps" in that people who would not get sick would now get sick and be more likely to die when otherwise they'd be just fine (*). This is an example of how counterproductive this can be (and has already happened among other groups, from the rich to the poor, though only in small groups, thankfully).

(* That this has also spawned some outright hate propaganda--not by you--also had me hyper-alert about it.)

And as many freak out over this, I've found the elderly I've interacted with refreshing. And they're neither getting sick nor getting others sick, nor are they the ones shutting everything down.

I also don't care for a society that often puts old people in a facility (that is normally, without disease) not out of medical concern, but so they can divvy up the goods early (a friend of mine lost his place after years of caring for the elderly landlord when the grown children had him put in a home and gave him the minimum amount of time to leave, but that's how this economy works, and I say to hell with that). The economy shouldn't be so much more important than the dignity of human beings, but it is (for a long, long time now), for people of all ages, and especially at that age. This is just another expression of that. Such an economy is not one I care about or see as important as you do.

As for the state of the economy...medical expenses come with a lot of price fixing without caps that are often illegal, as they should be, in other countries (even Japan which is otherwise not into universal health care at least applies price caps to prevent the abuses that go on in the USA). I'm also thinking of how many very sick people, including with pneumonia, have been kicked out for inability to pay and wanting to profit from more beds (which would be done for the coronavirus itself as well). This isn't doctors (who are more independent contractors) but the policies of Wall Street that owns the hospitals (that is, the economy itself that does it).

posted March 14, 2020 11:45 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by hypatia238:
and thank you for injecting!!!!!!!!!! love your input, thought provoking for sure

---

posted March 14, 2020 11:52 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Moonbeth:
The answer to your question, I think, lies in the fact there are no populations who are not at risk, only carriers who don't express the virus or do so mildly, but even though children and healthy adults are considered safer, nobody is immune and medical exceptions are a rule, so if you believe in the principle of quarantine, global is the way to go.
As for @PixieJane apparently taking offence, I haven't read the whole thing but your earlier comment shocked the hell out of me, arguing that it takes money to take care of ill people is already having integrated capitalism too much for me. I'm not saying you're wrong in our societies, but when I read someone wishes people cared more about people than money, I think that person, like me, rejects that whole system and feels right, not, that person is ignoring how things work and thinks wrong.
I don't think you're bad or meant harm, but as sensible as your comment is, the reality behind is what's very wrong and offensive.
On a purely instinctual level, I would have slaughtered with my bare hands anyone who'd have come after grandmother's needed health and care, had she been infected or not.
Having to consider letting old people die because they have less to live and we can't afford to treat everyone isn't tough but necessary money management for the preservation of the species. It's rather a proof we have so grossly mismanaged our societies and wealth it's now to the point it's endangering the species.
...in my humble opinion. I respect and appreciate your passion Belage 😊

---

I am grateful for your respect and appreciation, Moonbeth. It was never my intention to offend anyone, I only wanted to start a conversation and generate thinking. Social scientists who specialize in the impact of aging population have been talking about the upcoming issues and dilemna societies will be faced with, but the general public has not wanted to even think about it.

posted March 14, 2020 11:55 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PixieJane:
Locking people in their own homes for people already lonely and can't normally order everything to their homes because of a disease not anywhere as serious as people make it out to be is not a viable solution.

And it's catastrophizing, that is, people are imagining worse case scenarios and in some cases willing to impose suffering on others for their own well being when it's unnecessary and even counterproductive.

This isn't the apocalypse. This isn't Captain Trips from The Stand. It's people overreacting to clickbait articles and politicians wanting to be seen as taking a strong stance (whether it blows up in their face or not is yet to be seen, but I hope it does). Humanity is prone to hysteria and it's a trait that needs to be combated, and is far worse than even swine flu (which also killed children), which in turn was far worse than the current virus.

The economy you value knows how profitable fear and anger is, and so they spread it. I'm convinced that part of the reason that the most vulnerable aren't as in hysterics over this is because they're not constantly checking their phones for clickbait news (and though some never learn, some of us see patterns keep repeating, and this is a pattern I've seen before, though the overreaction to something that is almost trivial is disturbing).

Wall street companies make it, we keep falling for it. If our economy suffers for it, I just see it as a karmic lesson. And going by the panicked runs on the stores I say it's more than making up for the money lost. It seems to me that public services (libraries, schools, etc) are at the most risk rather than Wall Street anyway.

Deciding that a disease that isn't THAT serious means people need to be locked away and isolated because they're at risk (especially if locked up with others) is not only counterproductive economically and in terms of dealing with it, but it's unnecessary. It's learning the wrong lessons.

Old people are also customers who contribute to the economy (I'm curious how the economy will inevitably change after the last Boomer dies) and dismissing them as old and sick anyway (when many aren't sick, though their immune systems may be compromised from past illnesses) was incredibly callous. And it's just yet another overreaction to something that isn't that serious (well the reaction may be serious, but not the virus).

I don't recall your talking about only the sick being quarantined, but the most vulnerable so that everyone else can do well (due to how posts can be easily changed without any indication of it having been changed, something a few here have taken a lot of advantage of, I won't go back and look, just say it was my perception at the time), and it sounded as if you were willing for more drastic measures, like quarantining in facilities, which would be "concentration camps" in that people who would not get sick would now get sick and be more likely to die when otherwise they'd be just fine (*). This is an example of how counterproductive this can be (and has already happened among other groups, from the rich to the poor, though only in small groups, thankfully).

(* That this has also spawned some outright hate propaganda--not by you--also had me hyper-alert about it.)

And as many freak out over this, I've found the elderly I've interacted with refreshing. And they're neither getting sick nor getting others sick, nor are they the ones shutting everything down.

I also don't care for a society that often puts old people in a facility (that is normally, without disease) not out of medical concern, but so they can divvy up the goods early (a friend of mine lost his place after years of caring for the elderly landlord when the grown children had him put in a home and gave him the minimum amount of time to leave, but that's how this economy works, and I say to hell with that). The economy shouldn't be so much more important than the dignity of human beings, but it is (for a long, long time now), for people of all ages, and especially at that age. This is just another expression of that. Such an economy is not one I care about or see as important as you do.

As for the state of the economy...medical expenses come with a lot of price fixing without caps that are often illegal, as they should be, in other countries (even Japan which is otherwise not into universal health care at least applies price caps to prevent the abuses that go on in the USA). I'm also thinking of how many very sick people, including with pneumonia, have been kicked out for inability to pay and wanting to profit from more beds (which would be done for the coronavirus itself as well). This isn't doctors (who are more independent contractors) but the policies of Wall Street that owns the hospitals (that is, the economy itself that does it).

If anything needs to be kicked around, it's the economy that cause this panic that in turns has led to shut downs over a disease that isn't anywhere as bad as even swine flu was. Of course I'm talking about the current paradigm that rules it, which will inevitably change as it has changed many times in the past. It would be nice if human dignity were placed above profit and convenience for a change, but I know better than to hope for too much.

---

posted March 15, 2020 12:44 AM            

I worked for while as a social worker for the elderly and our goal was to help keep the elderly in their homes and not be institutionalized, it was my favorite social worker job bc I believed in the spirit of it. I don't understand why staying at home to avoid getting sick triggers you so much, yes is not fun but is better than jail or been in a hospital at least you are cozy and feel safe and is definitely an option for people at risk and all of us, is up to each of us though, I don't think people should be forced to stay at home unless they have the virus, then it makes sense they stay at home until they are not contagious.

Your statement to Belage: "The economy you value knows how profitable fear and anger is, and so they spread it." Both sides of the political spectrum love using fear tactics so I find it funny when one side points at the other telling them they are using fear tactics when they are equally guilty of it and completely unaware of it.

I will add that people don't understand that nothing is free and that printing more money devalues the money already out there and inflation has real consequences and makes living un-affordable and in the middle of life not been affordable for almost all of us lets tax you so you have even less money and lets continue printing more money so your money is worth less and less, lol I mean is a cycle that never ends and does not work and just leads to more poverty and dependency in the government while the government continues to become more poor until benefits/assistance are no longer able to be provided and then we devolve to a 3rd world country and can't really help any more people at risk and lose that privilege so yes it is important to care and protect the economy bc it has a real impact on everyone including the most vulnerable. Oh there you go I must be doing that fear tactic right now! it can just be a logical conclusion based on basic economic principles, must be a fear tactic.

posted March 15, 2020 11:54 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by hypatia238:
Pixie, in some regards I agree with you and I want to be optimistic about this bc it sucks to live in a state of anxiety but people are not over-reacting to clickbait articles, the CDC started to advise the masses to prepare so people did that. As for leaders responding to this the way they have, how could they not after the news we got from China and Italy in how this has impacted them, if leaders did not respond they would be criticized for that too, they can never win.

I worked for while as a social worker for the elderly and our goal was to help keep the elderly in their homes and not be institutionalized, it was my favorite social worker job bc I believed in the spirit of it. I don't understand why staying at home to avoid getting sick triggers you so much, yes is not fun but is better than jail or been in a hospital at least you are cozy and feel safe and is definitely an option for people at risk and all of us, is up to each of us though, I don't think people should be forced to stay at home unless they have the virus, then it makes sense they stay at home until they are not contagious.

Your statement to Belage: "The economy you value knows how profitable fear and anger is, and so they spread it." Both sides of the political spectrum love using fear tactics so I find it funny when one side points at the other telling them they are using fear tactics when they are equally guilty of it and completely unaware of it.

I will add that people don't understand that nothing is free and that printing more money devalues the money already out there and inflation has real consequences and makes living un-affordable and in the middle of life not been affordable for almost all of us lets tax you so you have even less money and lets continue printing more money so your money is worth less and less, lol I mean is a cycle that never ends and does not work and just leads to more poverty and dependency in the government while the government continues to become more poor until benefits/assistance are no longer able to be provided and then we devolve to a 3rd world country and can't really help any more people at risk and lose that privilege so yes it is important to care and protect the economy bc it has a real impact on everyone including the most vulnerable. Oh there you go I must be doing that fear tactic right now! it can just be a logical conclusion based on basic economic principles, must be a fear tactic.

Now talk to me about how men made climate change is not a fear tactic.

---

Thank you for explaining it better than I can. I just didn't have the energy...

Nor the motivation to keep defending myself against accusations that I value the economy more than people. I who have been homeless at some point, unemployed at times. And I have gone through quite a few up and down in the US economy. I can say I prefer the up better than the down. I am currently in my 60s, but in excellent health, and not worried about Covid-19 for myself. I do not want the economy to come to a grind. Not because I want to protect Wall Street, but because THE VULNERABLE PEOPLE DEPEND ON THE MONEY GENERATED BY THIS SO CALLED EVIL ECONOMY TO KEEP THEM ALIVE through their co-morbidities, multiple daily medications, multiple doctor follow up and care, hospital stays, surgeries and other medical interventions.

Not saying that our healthcare system doesn't need serious reforming, but that's a different convo for another day. Even if we had medicare for all, it would still require a significant chunk of evil money from the evil economy.