• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
HongKongFooy said:
Your stance evolved in the same post.

Maybe we do have an idea afterall.
Click to expand...
Thanks for taking 2 sentences and showing them out of context to try to make a point.

In context, sentence 1: what is considered high risk will change over time and has changed from the start. We don’t know for sure where the high risk group will fall out. Some conditions that put people into the high risk group today may end up not really being high risk and some other conditions may be added. It’s one of the major flaws of saying just isolate the high risk and be done with it.

Sentence 2: was in reference to @DisneyCane deciding who is high risk and who isn’t based on his own opinions. More than half the population of the US is currently labeled as high risk by the CDC and other experts. That’s the part that is a fact.

So why not be part of the conversation. How do we isolate the high risk? Who do we put in that group? The people the CDC and government classify as high risk or do we do use some other metric? Who gets to decide? It’s a flawed plan that can‘t work based on an oversimplified solution.
 
baymenxpac

baymenxpac

Well-Known Member
Polkadotdress said:
It’s been mentioned several times to “just” isolate the high-risk? Where? How? Are they going to living in special segregated apartments all by themselves? Also, do they no longer work? If so, how do they afford to live?

It’s also ironic that many who say “isolate the high risk” are the same ones complaining about the draconian no-visit measures at retirement/senior homes, which has resulted in their family member being...isolated because they are...you betcha, high risk.
Click to expand...
not isolate. protect.

here would be the pillars of that plan:

- all workers over the age of 60 to work from home, if they can
- all workers with a qualifying pre-existing condition (we know now just being obese or having asthma doesn't make covid a death sentence. it's really bad when accompanied by very severe underlying illness) to work from home, if they can
- develop and enhance rapid testing so it can be administered to ALL workers, residents, and inpatients at nursing home, hospitals, and other acute care facilities
- all people: recommend that you do not go to school, work, gatherings if you are symptomatic, especially where vulnerable people will be
- if you're feeling frisky on new government spending, temporarily expand medicare to allow it to be offered to people over the age of 60 (thus giving the option for workers that are looking for early retirement to limit the financial hit of health insurance)
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
baymenxpac said:
not isolate. protect.

here would be the pillars of that plan:

- all workers over the age of 60 to work from home, if they can
- all workers with a qualifying pre-existing condition (we know now just being obese or having asthma doesn't make covid a death sentence. it's really bad when accompanied by very severe underlying illness) to work from home, if they can
- develop and enhance rapid testing so it can be administered to ALL workers, residents, and inpatients at nursing home, hospitals, and other acute care facilities
- all people: recommend that you do not go to school, work, gatherings if you are symptomatic, especially where vulnerable people will be
- if you're feeling frisky on new government spending, temporarily expand medicare to allow it to be offered to people over the age of 60 (thus giving the option for workers that are looking for early retirement to limit the financial hit of health insurance)
Click to expand...
What if people can’t work from home? What if they are a bus driver or cop or firefighter or work at the grocery store?

Even if people work from home what if they need to ride a bus or go to a doctor’s appointment or a grocery store? They need to be able to still leave their homes, in some cases to eat and in others to have a quality of life. I’m not in the high risk group and not elderly but I don’t feel right telling people who are they need to stay home indefinitely.

I think we do need to protect the high risk group, but they have to have the ability to live and work or the economy will grind to a halt. We worry about restaurants and stores going under but if we tell a large portion of the population to isolate and avoid contact with others altogether that’s a lot of people sitting out of the economy. So bars that have primarily young and healthy people as customers may thrive but a lot of other businesses would suffer and they would also be without some of their key employees which only makes things worse.
 
baymenxpac

baymenxpac

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
What if people can’t work from home? What if they are a bus driver or cop or firefighter or work at the grocery store?

Even if people work from home what if they need to ride a bus or go to a doctor’s appointment or a grocery store? They need to be able to still leave their homes, in some cases to eat and in others to have a quality of life. I’m not in the high risk group and not elderly but I don’t feel right telling people who are they need to stay home indefinitely.

I think we do need to protect the high risk group, but they have to have the ability to live and work or the economy will grind to a halt. We worry about restaurants and stores going under but if we tell a large portion of the population to isolate and avoid contact with others altogether that’s a lot of people sitting out of the economy. So bars that have primarily young and healthy people as customers may thrive but a lot of other businesses would suffer and they would also be without some of their key employees which only makes things worse.
Click to expand...
well, this is all optional, except for testing at nursing home and ACF, which is where the virus does the most harm.

but what you're saying is going to be a problem in general, right? that's what we saw in the spring. exposure can't really be prevented, it can be limited. so limit it for the vulnerable, have the young and healthy do the work of building the population resistance. and in the meantime, society doesn't grind to a halt.
 
DisneyDebRob

DisneyDebRob

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
What if people can’t work from home? What if they are a bus driver or cop or firefighter or work at the grocery store?

Even if people work from home what if they need to ride a bus or go to a doctor’s appointment or a grocery store? They need to be able to still leave their homes, in some cases to eat and in others to have a quality of life. I’m not in the high risk group and not elderly but I don’t feel right telling people who are they need to stay home indefinitely.

I think we do need to protect the high risk group, but they have to have the ability to live and work or the economy will grind to a halt. We worry about restaurants and stores going under but if we tell a large portion of the population to isolate and avoid contact with others altogether that’s a lot of people sitting out of the economy. So bars that have primarily young and healthy people as customers may thrive but a lot of other businesses would suffer and they would also be without some of their key employees which only makes things worse.
Click to expand...
Also a lot of workers with pre existing conditions, whstever their age or severity of the condition I’m sure don’t feel comfortable telling their work place they need to work from home. Many don’t want to stay home to work.. others don’t want people to know their business.
 
baymenxpac

baymenxpac

Well-Known Member
DisneyDebRob said:
Also a lot of workers with pre existing conditions, whstever their age or severity of the condition I’m sure don’t feel comfortable telling their work place they need to work from home. Many don’t want to stay home to work.. others don’t want people to know their business.
Click to expand...
and that's where we arrive at the crux of this whole thing, right? for a time (and still, in some states), we're doing that for everyone. making the risk determination for people, making people call everyone they know they they're getting tested, etc. which is why some pivoted to the civil liberties issue of this debate early on.

in my view, the absolute biggest thing we can do it protect nursing homes/LTC facilities. the truth of the matter is that everyone else has to make an individualized assessment of risk, privacy, etc. where we do intervene and protect, it's better we achieve these with a scalpel than a hatchet.
 
DisneyDebRob

DisneyDebRob

Well-Known Member
baymenxpac said:
and that's where we arrive at the crux of this whole thing, right? for a time (and still, in some states), we're doing that for everyone. making the risk determination for people, making people call everyone they know they they're getting tested, etc. which is why some pivoted to the civil liberties issue of this debate early on.

in my view, the absolute biggest thing we can do it protect nursing homes/LTC facilities. the truth of the matter is that everyone else has to make an individualized assessment of risk, privacy, etc. where we do intervene and protect, it's better we achieve these with a scalpel than a hatchet.
Click to expand...
I agree mostly with you. After reading your post I went to the cdc to see which conditions they warn about if you want to stay safe. They list them as strongest evidence, mixed evidence and limited evidence. I’ll put the link below. That list could cover more then half of the population. Not only that with the latest reports of it damaging the heart and they don’t know if it’s for a lifetime or not(was reported yesterday that 63% of the people they looked at in MT. Sinai had some sort of heart damage after having the virus). That included all ages that they checked.

www.cdc.gov

COVID-19 and Your Health

Symptoms, testing, what to do if sick, daily activities, and more.
www.cdc.gov www.cdc.gov
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
baymenxpac said:
well, this is all optional, except for testing at nursing home and ACF, which is where the virus does the most harm.

but what you're saying is going to be a problem in general, right? that's what we saw in the spring. exposure can't really be prevented, it can be limited. so limit it for the vulnerable, have the young and healthy do the work of building the population resistance. and in the meantime, society doesn't grind to a halt.
Click to expand...
You can’t eliminate all exposure. I agree with that. What we can do is limit exposure to everyone (including the high risk population) by implementing some simple safety measures nationwide:
  • Masks anywhere outside the home where social distancing isn’t possible
  • social distancing everywhere
  • no large group gatherings (at home or in public)
  • for indoor activities masks and distancing are especially important.
  • For restaurants and bars: masks for all staff, masks for all customers except when seated at a table eating, all tables 6 feet apart, no seating at the bar, no standing room area
  • When possible allow high risk workers to either work remotely or work in a role with less contact with the public
  • Any worker that can work remotely should be
  • Continue to offer “senior hours“ and/or carve out times and places where high risk people can go about tjeir business with less chance of exposure, if possible.
If all of this was implemented and followed and enforced nationwide I believe the case counts would be much lower and everyone would be able to participate in the economy and go about their business. I would still encourage higher risk people to avoid large crowd places like a theme park or indoor dining venue but that would be voluntary.

On the economic front, the vast majority of the economy can function under the scenario laid out above. Maybe not every single business, but the vast majority, so the economy and society don‘t need to grind to a halt. The final step would be to look at the businesses and workers directly harmed by there rules and have the government make them whole. Business owners and also their workers. I’m not saying any of this is easy, but it’s doable if we all bought in.
 
C

Chip Chipperson

Well-Known Member
Jwink said:
All is fine. Nothing to see 🤦🏼‍♀️https://www.wftv.com/news/local/flo...-return-in-person/TRURZY66UBHB3PFMLCNSNL42OE/

people don’t realize just because they’re ‘done’ with the virus it doesn’t mean the virus is ‘done’ with us!
Click to expand...

There's nothing that says "incompetent" quite like issuing blanket, one-size-fits-all orders without seeking any input to find out if there will be any negative consequences from said order. What's the harm in virtual meetings? They allow more citizens to participate and maintains social distancing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom