You have to have quite a long memory for this "games" to be played out, because the actual death toll will likely be only known much later as people do extensive study just who died of the corona-viirus — ssu

Not really. As long as we wish to continue with this admittedly profoundly offensive game analogy, the rules of victory can be defined however we wish, meaning we can agree to look at data on any decided upon date, perhaps when there is a declaration the pandemic has ended. It also stands to reason that the initial error rates in assigning causes of death by nation should be roughly the same, but, of course, maybe not.

But, as a word of clarification, the origin of this game analogy came from @Benkei's post where he referenced the US infection rate as being now competitive in the coranavirus Olympics, something I choose to take literally in making my point, or not, that nobody thinks this as a game, Even if one believes the US response under Trump is inept, the response I'd think should be sympathetic as opposed to ridiculing.

Even if one believes the US response under Trump is inept, the response I'd think should be sympathetic as opposed to ridiculing — Hanover

Isn't an inept response by definition ridiculous, and deserving of ridicule? How is society going to learn without signals such as ridiculing the inept?

I though we wanted to debate what's true and what's false. The important proposition being "is Trump inept or not"; which, if factual, clearly far outweighs in terms of merit for discussion people's feelings about "strong language" that points in the direction of Trump's ineptness.

So, what's with the feelings police?

And, if you want to play feelings police, why aren't you criticizing Trump and his followers for making light of the situation before? Shouldn't you at least preamble your criticism of with "Yes, Trump and a lot of his followers weren't really sympathetic to the idea this pandemic is a problem nor with the people who died 'due to something no worse than the flu', and ridiculing people on the left who were concerned about it, and not simply in the form of words, but taking actions designed to spread the disease faster in order to virtue signal their lack of sympathy for those that disagreed with Trump's message it was a hoax and will go away or is in any case no worse than the flu and plenty of people work through it and get better; and so not only hurt feelings but have and will cause many deaths", then, having recognized this and the hypocrisy of Trump and his followers having "hurt feelings" now with regard to criticism of Trump's inept handling of the crisis (assuming it's inept as you say), go on to make your point that analogies should be carefully selected to not hurt anyone's feelings, and not just actual people with hurt feelings about the analogy but also people who aren't themselves really hurt by it, but can understand the point being made, but nevertheless could imagine someone else, who isn't here, who could maybe be hurt by it, if they were here.

OK snowflake. Or instead you can take that comment in the context that it was made, with fellow Trumpanzees defending the orange-oetan's ineptitude with "typical optimism" and accusing others of "politising" and creating "hoaxes". Where's your outrage at those games, huh?

Seriously speaking, this macabre example does tell us something:

There is a genuine incentive not to be open with the numbers of infected and especially with the deaths.

The less you test, the less dire the situation looks and if deaths aren't piling up and the health system isn't overwhelmed, things look better! And far easier simply for the officials say that this old person perished to the common flu. Or simply not to report them. Iran is the best example of this where nobody thinks that the official statistics are anywhere close to the real ones. And just how many died we may not know.

Then of course is the question just when you stop counting? If corona-virus isn't just for a year with us, but for longer time. Viruses like the Ebola are so deadly that they usually kill themselves quickly, but this covid-19 might stay far longer or simply mutate to be covid-21 or covid-29.

Ok, how about gun violence? The reaction to gun violence vs coronavirus is down to mythology. I'll stand by that.

Thanks to Trump, the USA seems to be winning the corona Olympics. Now in third place.

No harm no foul. He was just being optimistic. — Benkei

Trump is not responsible for the caseload in the US. Stop being a retard.

Right. So if I can divert a train from only hitting 50 people instead of 100, I'm not to blame if it hits all 100 of them? Sound ethics. Carry on. :up:

Right. So if I can divert a train from only hitting 50 people instead of 100, I'm not to blame if it hits all 100 of them? — Benkei

So you're going to continue being a retard. Fine.

What's retarded is not seeing Trump's culpability in the fiasco running its course in the US right now and instead you resort to calling me names twice. Nice. I get you had 12 hour shift just now and you're tired and I'm not bothered by the name calling. But I'm bothered with the fact too many Americans are still not prepared to call a spade a spade.

This article provides a very interesting perspective on the spread of coronavirus, its containment, and prospects for returning to normalcy.

Summary of the article: Strong coronavirus measures today should only last a few weeks, there shouldn’t be a big peak of infections afterwards, and it can all be done for a reasonable cost to society, saving millions of lives along the way. If we don’t take these measures, tens of millions will be infected, many will die, along with anybody else that requires intensive care, because the healthcare system will have collapsed.

Since Trump does all his own press conferences, what we get is a crystal clear window on the mind of a doddering fool. Did he make things worse? I don't really see how.

What should his administration have done differently?

Sick and evil stuff. But schadenfreude has been the going rate among this species of dogma for quite some time now, long before the pandemic began. We've come to the point that only a complete and utter disaster can make them feel better about being wrong and making false predictions all these years.

OK snowflake. Or instead you can take that comment in the context that it was made, with fellow Trumpanzees defending the orange-oetan's ineptitude with "typical optimism" and accusing others of "politising" and creating "hoaxes". Where's your outrage at those games, huh? — Benkei

It is really difficult to write opinions without inventive name-calling, isn`t it? Ever considered that is not only not an argument, but also counterproductive?

Ever considered that is not only not an argument, but also counterproductive? — Nobeernolife

This coming from you of all people. :lol:

This coming from you of all people. — praxis

Yeah, I have been talking about TDS, which I see as real medical situation. (Scott Adams says the same.) That is not meant as name-calling, but I can see that some take it as such. However, I always try to stay away from calling people things like "libtards", matching Benkei`s level of communication. No?

So it turns out the Spanish Flu didn't actually originate in Spain. Top contenders are France, Britain, China, and the United States. It's only known as the Spanish Flu because France, Britain, and the United States were suppressing news about it due to WWI, and so all the news came from Spain.

So it turns out the Spanish Flu didn't actually originate in Spain. Top contenders are France, Britain, China, and the United States. It's only known as the Spanish Flu because France, Britain, and the United States were suppressing news about it due to WWI, and so all the news came from Spain. — Michael

Yeah, and guess what... nobody screams about "racism" because we call it the Spanish flue.

Yeah, I have been talking about TDS, which I see as real medical situation. (Scott Adams says the same.) That is not meant as name-calling, but I can see that some take it as such. — Nobeernolife

But it is not a real medical situation and you know it. And who cares what Scott Adams says? Is he your authority? What it is, is your go-to rebuttal for every occasion. How helpful and convenient that anyone who has a different point of view is rendered unable to think on your level because they are sick. Do you imagine that every time you type that someone is going to thank you for the diagnosis and run to the doctor. No you don't. You type it because it makes you feel better. Safe and secure that you don't have to think. Why are you even here? Are you angry? Scared?

Yeah, I have been talking about TDS, which I see as real medical situation. (Scott Adams says the same.) — Nobeernolife

So you and a cartoonist making a medical diagnosis. Is this somehow productive? If you believe it is then kindly present a reasonable argument to support this belief.

But it is not a real medical situation and you know it. And who cares what Scott Adams says? Is he your authority? — Monitor

No I don´t know that at all. This kind of mass hysteria really looks like a medical situation; this is actually something that happens to humans easily. And Scott Adams gives extremely good insights, I have been following him for a while find him spot on again and again. You might want to check him out.

How helpful and convenient that anyone who has a different point of view is rendered unable to think on your level because they are sick. — Monitor

Err, no, that was not was I am saying. Don´t fall into Cathy Newman mode here...

So you and a cartoonist making a medical diagnosis. Is this somehow productive? — praxis

Well, Adams is also a trained hypnotist and looks at the human situation from that point. I am following him because he is insightful and has an incredibly good track record. Of course, if all you know about him is that he is a "cartoonist", then you would not know.
Anyway, I did agree that TDS can be misunderstood as personal name-calling, But surely you agree that it is not on the same level as "Trumpanzees" or "Orange-Otan".

How helpful and convenient that anyone who has a different point of view is rendered unable to think on your level because they are sick.
— Monitor
Err, no, that was not was I am saying. Don´t fall into Cathy Newman mode here... — Nobeernolife

The entire point of TDS is an attempt to invalidate opposing views. Even you must realize this on some level.

The entire point of TDS is an attempt to invalidate opposing views. Even you must realize this on some level. — praxis

Well, if the "opposing view" is so predictable, emotional, repetitive, and consisting mostly of slogans, and is met with name-calling instead of explanations, it is really hard to take it other than as a condition. For which TDS is a good description.
Of course, there are rational critics of Trump (Scott Adams is one), but they argue completely differently.

Well, Adams is also a trained hypnotist and looks at the human situation from that point. — Nobeernolife

A cartoonist AND hypnotist. He’s definitely managed to influence you on a deep level (below the intellect).

Anyway, I did agree that TDS can be misunderstood as personal name-calling, But surely you agree that it is not on the same level as "Trumpanzees" or "Orange-Otan". — Nobeernolife

You were politely asked to present an argument showing how it’s productive to use this term. Or perhaps you don’t actually care about productivity and good argumentation. :chin:

OK snowflake. Or instead you can take that comment in the context that it was made, with fellow Trumpanzees defending the orange-oetan's ineptitude with "typical optimism" and accusing others of "politising" and creating "hoaxes". Where's your outrage at those games, huh? — Benkei

Whether I'm hypocrite or snowflake notwithstanding, the point is that there is a consistent disdain for Trump that goes beyond rationality, even to the point of hoping for his failure despite who may suffer in his path. The truth is that the US has controlled the virus as well as any other nation so far and hasn't shown any greater ineptitude than the others. There's also the lingering question about the malaria drug, which might show greater promise than expected and that would not have gotten as much traction as it did without Trump.

hmmm... You're asking me this because you are at a loss of examples of countries who are managing the disease well? What did Japan do? Or South Korea? I have examples via LinkedIn from peers across the world that were traveling the past few months, where even relatively poor African countries had a health questionnaire and measured temperatures of everyone arriving and then returning to the US with no check whatsoever. So while instituting a travel ban on China (for foreign nationals), but combine that with not checking people coming in is simply incoherent. In the one hand you acknowledge a problem in China but on the other you don't check anyone (US nationals) coming in.

You were politely asked to present an argument showing how it’s productive to use this term. — praxis

It is descriptive, not productive. Do you think terms like Trumpanzees and OrangeOtan are either?

And, if you want to play feelings police, why aren't you criticizing Trump and his followers for making light of the situation before? Shouldn't you at least preamble your criticism of ↪Benkei with "Yes, Trump and a lot of his followers weren't really sympathetic to the idea this pandemic is a problem nor with the people who died 'due to something no worse than the flu', and ridiculing people on the left who were concerned about it, and not simply in the form of words, but taking actions designed to spread the disease faster in order to virtue signal their lack of sympathy for those that disagreed with Trump's message it was a hoax and will go away or is in any case no worse than the flu and plenty of people work through it and get better; and so not only hurt feelings but have and will cause many deaths", then, having recognized this and the hypocrisy of Trump and his followers having "hurt feelings" now with regard to criticism of Trump's inept handling of the crisis (assuming it's inept as you say), go on to make your point that analogies should be carefully selected to not hurt anyone's feelings, and not just actual people with hurt feelings about the analogy but also people who aren't themselves really hurt by it, but can understand the point being made, but nevertheless could imagine someone else, who isn't here, who could maybe be hurt by it, if they were here. — boethius

I wouldn't preamble my criticism that way because I don't talk in single sentences that take up half a page. But, to the position that my criticism of others would have been better received had I acknowledged my hypocrisy and then recited a long long winded self excoriation, I'd just ask that you pretend that happened. Now that we're working under the assumption I followed your directions, will you now acknowledge that my post was fully correct in substance, or were your above comments just an irrelevant chastisement? My guess is that it's the latter.

You're asking me this because you are at a loss of examples of countries who are managing the disease well? What did Japan do? Or South Korea? — Benkei

South Korea took an extremely aggressive approach, Japan still has no curfew, no official limit on public gatherings, no pub closures, no testing at the airport, no mass checks like Korea. What Japan does have is controlled borders, a travel stop from China (at the same time as the US, as far as I remember), and cancellation of official events. And a very cohesive culture with high hygiene and little unnecessary touching. And a very low Corona rate.
I think you are cherry-picking from a complex broad situation, trying to find snippets that fit into a "blame Trump" narrative.

You were politely asked to present an argument showing how it’s productive to use this term.
— praxis

It is descriptive, not productive. — Nobeernolife

Yes, of course it’s not. At least you’re able to admit that. Good, the first step to addressing a problem is knowing of its existence.

Whether I'm hypocrite or snowflake notwithstanding, the point is that there is a consistent disdain for Trump that goes beyond rationality, — Hanover

Yep. It is obvious, but once you call it TDS, you get blamed for name calling, you Trumpanzee....