image has nothing to do with commies??!
thing is, classical ANYTHING is a "high information" concept, due to the existence of positive & negative rights, as well as having to understand the heavily philosophical and experimental nature of our government.
todays "low-information" idiot voters and dems cannot possibly get this shit.
well they paid him off after fucking him twice, like a hooker. poor bernie.
no it was bad back then, too. you did change. you got wiser.
this needs far more upvotes. this is why i'm here. i'm a classical liberal, and we're a dying breed. the core of the constitution and the enlightenment values it seeks to uphold speaks to us. its strange but classical liberals must unite with conservatives to defeat woke bullshit.
I'm sorry for your family's losses and hope everything turns out well for you and yours.
My story is not fake, however. With a good relationship with a bank and a few 10's of thousands, it was quite easy to turn it into hundreds of thousands.
that's infuriating
update: it says when i provide ID and SSN
"We may need more information to find your record.
Please try again and include your California driver license or identification number and the last four digits of your social security number. If we are still unable to match your record, please contact your county elections officeopens new window or the California Secretary of State at [email protected] new window or phone: (800) 345-8683."
WHY WOULD IT SAY THAT IF SHE WASN'T REGISTERED? WOULDN'T IT SAY "THIS PERSON IS NOT REGISTERED" JFC how fucked is this system. guess who i'm calling come monday.
"they'll listen to reason"
-snow crash
live in CA, wife has green card and thankfully wasnt sent a ballot
oh right i'm the enemy because i'm the coastal elite with a phd in STEM, working at a pharma company.
take your indignation and put it to something constructive. i'm one of you.
I'm a logical rational person, i'm sick of the libs/dems/radical left as much as anyone here. if you're upset w/ me, you're upset with the wrong person. i'm fighting against the CCP, interviewing with reporters, to stop the bogus scientific reporting about this virus, chrissakes.
final point. money isn't time. only 1 of my stocks made $5000 today. of numerous. when you know how to make it, in this inflationary fucked up economy, you realize money isnt time. money is not even real, the fed just keeps printing it.
i have multiple millions of $ in stocks and mutual funds. cant relate. maybe your uncle could have taken a loan and yolo'd some money into the insane stock market back in february like me? just a thought.
be civil and take your curses elsewhere.
i understand. all i can say is the best empirical evidence for the chance of adverse effects is by looking at the CFR which is based on confirmed cases, either through a positive PCR and/or hospital admission. they're not always scary.
how can you assess anything in "people who had it and didn't get tested". where are the numbers? Asymptomatic people still get PCR tests (i get tested every week!). That's how we get the data.
You need some form of number to do quantitative data analysis, statistics. Do you understand?
i live in reality, i find it dismissive of you to say that and also to strawman my position like that in your quote.
just look at the link i posted, it goes into 85+ to see how it skews, rather than assuming. it does skew, but the rate isn't less than 2% for 70 to 75. look at the charts.
"You are incorrectly assuming that 100% of infections are reported in your math," what? no, neither I nor the CDC are assuming 100% of infections are in those figures. those are based on confirmed cases which is different from what the numbers would be that underly the IFR. CFR is confirmed through PCR or also usually through symptoms and hospital admittance. don't get stuck on the unconfirmed anduntest and unadmitted numbers. thats a fugazi, and not an empirical way of understanding chance of death.
you have to look at confirmed cases and confirmed outcomes.
your bar for "slavery" is far too low. imagine if those elderly were your parents, uncles/aunts/grandparents. have a little empathy, fren.
i am actually very active in the #drastic covid-origins community on twitter. i'm fighting against the CCP. you're mentally ill.
.....what?
That's a great question!! Well, media is reporting he is hospitalized. It counts.
agreed on the mini-holocaust. terrible management.
i wouldnt' say i used it as a reference point, those are your words. I just pulled it up as a statistic i recall reading and calculating myself a while back.
what reference would you rather use?
maybe a better example for the less statistically inclined (like you):
If you had a 2% chance to win the lottery every week, i'm 100% certain you'd buy as many tickets as possible.
If your parachute had a 2% chance of not working and you were skydiving, you'd want to switch to one that had a 0.02% chance, I'm 100% certain.
that's 1/50. That's high. For death. Or anything with great consequences!
that's not the CFR. show your math.
No one wants to. I won't perpetually wear one. But in my home country, people wear masks when ill all the time. no social stigma and it isnt hard (korea)
eh, mask wearing shouldnt be a political issue. i'll probably get downvoted. i support trump. i also know that even surgical mask wearing is associated with reduced risk of influenza and sars transmission and this is from papers BEFORE the pandemic (hence, less likely to be fucking politically biased)
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/11/1934/4068747
Eight observational studies assessed the effectiveness of rPPE in protecting HCWs against pH1N1 infection (Tables S6–S10).
Early in the outbreak, the effectiveness of masks and respirators was assessed in HCWs who had been exposed to pH1N1 cases in California [38]. Seroconversion against pH1N1 was detected in 21% (9/43) of HCWs attending pH1N1-patients without rPPE but none of the HCWs wearing a mask or N95 respirator (Table S14) [38].
In a cohort study from Hong Kong, all HCWs who reported using a medical mask during patient contact remained healthy, whereas 1.5% (4/268) of HCWs not using any rPPE developed laboratory-confirmed pH1N1 infection (Table S14) [39].
to me, if i can wear a mask to improve my odds of safety, i'll do it for myself. full stop.
Granted i've worked for nearly a decade and a half in hospitals and scientific labs/vivariums where i needed to mask up, so i'm not a gigantic pussy about wearing a mask in general
OK! I'm pulling mine from peer reviewed articles.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7247470/
the data vary depending on a lot of factors, but in NY CFR approached 20%. I don't trust Chinese #s, neither should you.
I'm thinking you might be misinterpreting the CDC data, which, I'll humor you and others, looks like this (and this is a VERY broad strokes picture, with less accuracy than a scientific publication):
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#demographics Cases by Age Group / Deaths by Age Group ( and these data are weeks old now)
for ages 65+ (42091 + 54534 + 65654) / (816130 + 443535 + 283992)
= ~10.5% CFR, and that's a broadstrokes picture of CFR in geriatrics, not accounting for location or other factors. So in general, its nearly double what you say it is, and depending on some factors, can reach 20% like what I said.
you're gonna find I'm right! But that's good, because it means if you look at the chart, you can see in people under 50, the odds are EXTREMLY low for death (but I'm reserving commentary on OTHER factors, like cognitive issues or longterm respiratory/pulmonary issues, for which I have seen evidence. sure its not death but it's not a 100% recovery rate for many people). For people above 50, it can be around 2%, which is not great odds. as you can see it gets worse for older people, especially those who dont have the great medical care Trump got!
Anyway, if you read this, great. again, i have a phd in a biostats heavy STEM field, I think know what I'm talking about, i'm approaching this with nuance, (i even said "I think its ~20%" expressing a little unsureness, while you casually and quickly say "It's 6% dude.. " with no indication of unsureness) and provided a legitimate source. i'm willing to hear why you offhandedly dismissed me with the 6% number.
you're reading it selectively and wrong: i do not lie. previously i said "i have multiple millions of $ in stocks and mutual funds."
I did not make all those millions in 7 months. Most of it was from previous ventures and earnings. This last 7+ months was a windfall and I have 1 example of turning a few 10s of thousands into hundreds of thousands in that time.