We all know that actors, singers, and other celebrities have access to the best healthcare the world has to offer. Many celebrities have overcome great obstacles; other's met their untimely demise. Celebrities that contract COVID-19 are no different. Some have overcome the virus, while other celebrities fall prey to the deadly virus.
Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson recovered from the coronavirus; Joe Diffie and Andrew Jack died from complications from the merciless virus. Those celebrities that died from complications were all 50+ years old. Meanwhile, celebrities — both young and old — are recovering from the virus.
So, how much does age play a factor in deaths with COVID-19 complications? Apparently, quite a bit. Studies, although limited in nature, show that the majority of the deceased that died from complications from coronavirus are elderly men. Other commonalities include diabetes, coronary disease, and high blood pressure.
While the virus does have commonalities, it is not limited to only those that are men or old or coronary disease. Women and children have also met their demise from this deadly virus. Money also does not play a factor in who lives and who dies.
My viewpoint on COVID-19 treatment scares me. The level of care available to those well off to treat coronavirus does not necessarily play a factor in who survives. This is a new strand of COVID-19 and little is known on how to treat individuals who contract the virus.
That is why it is important to:
Isolationism is an international relations theory I learned about during my time attending the University of Nebraska. Switzerland is the most popular country that practices isolationism.
This is not a new approach for the United States or other places around the world. After Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, the United States left isolationism and entered World War II fighting against Japan, Germany, and other Axis powers. The United States joined the Allies to defeat the Axis ending World War II.
Since then, the United States switched between an isolationist country and global engagement for the last 200+ years. As with any other theory, there are pros and cons to isolationism.
When a country, such as the United States, practices isolationism, it allows the government to spend more money on domestic issues — like COVID-19 by spending less on its military budget.
However, as mentioned earlier, with pros comes cons. The economy may suffer by restricting passage to the United States. Isolationism also makes the United States more vulnerable to conflict with foreign adversaries. As Trotsky — a Marxist theorist — mentioned in the early 1900s, even though you may not be looking for war, war may look for you.
With that said, the United States must remain vigilant during this troubled time caused by COVID-19. America is at one of its most vulnerable moments with the pandemic spreading to small towns and metropolitan areas. The economy is in turmoil. Unemployment claims are rising to numbers never seen in recent history with over 3M claims last week alone. Hospitals are running out of beds. This is the prime opportunity that our adversaries have waited years to capitalize on — a vulnerable America.
So, what is in our favor? COVID-19 is affecting everyone state and non-state actors alike. Closing our borders and grounding our planes work to make it more difficult for our adversaries to enter the United States and reduce the spread of the coronavirus at the same time.
My viewpoint on isolationism is that closing our borders temporarily and putting America first is not necessarily a bad thing during the COVID-19 outbreak or any other pandemic for that matter. Why? We have over 300M people living in the United States right now. Of those, approximately one-tenth of a percent or 1:1,000 of Americans have tested positive for the coronavirus. President Trump has increased the projected number of Americans who will become infected with this deadly virus.
While I support isolationism during this time, we — the United States — also need to pour additional funding into the WHO and other international health organizations to work on a vaccine reducing the likelihood of spreading the disease further. At its current infectious rate, every American will have someone close to them at least become a carrier of COVID-19. I hope that we can get control of this outbreak before every American is close to someone who dies from the coronavirus.
In my next post, I will discuss COVID-19 treatment.
Numerous media sources report the United States is now the center of COVID-19. Their reasoning includes the speculation that reported COVID-19 cases in the United States have surpassed those of both Italy and China.
Do you ever wonder what the media decides not to report to make the report more interesting? Well, in this case, it’s the actual numbers. However, in their defense, the media cannot report what is not there. Although, the media could pressure China to continue reporting accurately.
It is in the world’s best interest to know actual numbers to determine if anything is working for the rest of the world to test the treatment to ensure the safety of its citizens.
There was a recent New York Times article the barely mentioned that some individuals are skeptical of China’s infectious disease reporting and deaths. Over a 1,000% increase in cremations in China within the last month alone signifies that the Chinese government could attempt to hide the actual number of deaths from COVID-19.
My viewpoint on COVID-19 numbers is that between the CDC and China reporting inaccuracies with H1N1 and COVID-19, respectively, makes it extremely difficult to compare the diseases. Additionally, it is inaccurate to compare one disease to another or two or more countries with the same virus. This is due to the environment and mutation of any disease, resulting in a different strand of the disease.
Please continue to wash your hands, practice social distancing, and keep affection to a minimum. We are all in this together and we will get through this.
In my next post, I will discuss isolationism.
Until next time...
While I am a proponent of an economic’s law called supply and demand, I strongly oppose price gauging. Used correctly, the law of supply and demand will either encourage or discourage the purchasing power to ensure essential items remain stocked during a state of emergency.
According to various websites, anti-price gauging laws vary across states. Over half of the states within America prohibit a supplier from charging "unconscionable prices" for "necessary goods and services" during the 30-day period following a declared state of emergency.
There is a simple test to determine if a price is too high. If the price grossly exceeds the price charged for the same or similar goods and services during the ten day’s prior to the state of emergency.
For instance, in New Jersey a ten percent (10%) price increase during an emergency would be unlawful under most circumstances. In Pennsylvania, there is an assumption that a twenty percent (20%) increase is unlawful, but lower price increases could be deemed unlawful depending on the circumstances.
Before you say, “I cannot afford a 10% to 20% increase in toilet paper or other essentials, the increase is less than one cup of coffee at your favorite cafe. After all, what in the hell are you doing at your favorite cafe during an epidemic? Make your own coffee at home, people. If you still feel that you cannot afford on average a 50 cent to $1 increase on toilet paper, look to see how much toilet paper you have and ask yourself, “If I supported the supply and demand law, would I still have toilet paper?”
Now, we all know that the below examples are price gauging and I hope that if you see prices this high that 1) you do not buy the product and 2) that you report it to the proper authorities in your state.
My viewpoint on anti-price gauging is that businesses should increase their price points within the limits of the law to curb the demand. However, businesses should also limit the amount of these essentials an individual can buy to further prevent profiteers during a state of emergency or otherwise.
This should also apply at Christmas time and with entertainment such as concerts. Like, who in their right mind would buy a Ryan’s World egg for $100+. These are the people who support profiteering, because without buyers, we wouldn’t have profiteers.
Seriously, get your priorities straight!
Some individuals diagnosed with anxiety or depression, hoarding is a symptom. Some individuals are profiteers. Yet, other people hoard because their survival instincts kick in to ensure the survival of their families. Mix all of these together and you have empty store shelves. The rest of us suffer without these essentials regardless of the reason. In the end, this hurts everyone.
How does this hurt everyone?
Supply and demand within economics is a theory used in free markets. The supply in this post refers to medical supplies, cleaning agents, and paper products. These industries are experiencing an increased demand where companies have a low supply. In a normal free market, the price would increase due to the high demand.
However, during a state of emergency, anti-gauging laws require industries to maintain prices prior to the state of emergency. Who does this law hurt in the end? EVERYONE! How? There are no paper products, cleaning agents, and limited to no medical supplies in the stores.
So, how do we ensure that this does not happen again during a crisis?
The federal government should revise its anti-gauging laws and stores should limit the number of these items customers can purchase at the first sign of a crisis.
My viewpoint on hoarding is that those private profiteers buying up all of these items and placing them on the internet to sell at a ridiculous cost are not heroes. They are cons and selfish individuals. Who in the hell would sell medical supplies or any other necessities at such a high profit margin? The greedy people that have no souls and only care about themselves. I agree with the chains that prohibit these people from returning items for a refund. This allows the stores to teach these profiteers NOT to attempt to try this again. It will also curb potential profiteers from behaving this way in future crises.
For example, someone in my family suffers from migraines. This family member was unable to find Excedrin Migraine at any brick and mortar store. They looked online, and at their dismay, a 300 capsule bottle that typically cost under $10 was listed on Amazon and eBay for a minimum of $75 going well over $150.
Next time, I will review anti-gauging laws and how the government should revise these laws for the next crisis.
There are numerous rumors going around fueling our fear for the current situation, economic downturn, potential recession, and MARTIAL LAW.
In this post, I will explain martial law, who has the power to issue martial law and activate the guard, what authorities the national guard has during a state of emergency, and how the Tenth Amendment applies. I will also explain what we — as citizens— can do to prevent martial law.
Martial law is when direct military action takes over normal civilian functions typically in times of a state of emergency to include a public health pandemic. Many governors are declaring a state of emergency and President Trump has issued a national emergency. The president and Congress can activate the national guard in all states. The governor has the authority to activate the guard within their state only. Martial law is only used as a last resort.
It’s worth noting, former VP Biden mentioned that he would have already activated the national guard on a national level.
The national guard protects law-abiding citizens from harm and all businesses from looters. The national guard can also construct makeshift shelters to serve as hospitals to save the regular hospitals for the acutely ill. They also can enforce any curfews. The national guard has the authority to arrest those breaking the law and may be subject to court martial.
The Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution gives states enumerated powers. This means that powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the state.
As citizens, we have the power within our selves to control our urges to loot, take the law into our own hand, and to obey those laws put into place to protect us and our businesses. Civil unrest will force a governor’s hand to activate the guard. If the disorder is on a large scale across many states, we will force the president’s or Congress hand to activate the guard in all states.
Based on our actions thus far, by going into survival mode and hoarding paper goods and medical supplies, we place those not able to purchase those items at risk of contracting the virus. This will put the hoarders at risk of contracting COVID-19, because the others have no way to combat the virus. With that said, as the death toll continues to rise, we will be in an enhanced state of survival, I see no alternative but to activate the national guard.
My viewpoint on martial law is that the lawmakers should only use this power as a last resort. We cannot blame our politicians for protecting us and our property by taking this action. We only have each other to blame.
The first two MONTHS during H1N1, the CDC reported at least one MILLION Americans were infected with H1N1. During the H1N1 global pandemic, 980 schools closed in the United States and 607,778 students contracted H1N1. The elderly were largely unaffected by H1N1. It mainly affected the young. These individuals who contracted H1N1 were typically in better health leading to a lower mortality rate.
On the other hand, the elderly are at a higher risk of contracting COVID-19. These individuals typically have a lower immune system leading to a higher mortality rate. This infectious disease is also more contagious than H1N1. So, is it fair to compare apples to oranges? You decide!
In my opinion, if you really want to compare the two flu strands, leave out the number of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. COVID-19 is also a more complicated flu strand, which could explain the increased time needed to develop tests and vaccines. If we are to compare anything, compare President Trump’s actions to those of President Obama.
From a CDC historical report:
Once the numbers of cases increased beyond the point where counting of individual cases was practical, on July 23, 2009, CDC reported the number of 2009 cases for the last time...This methodology and the resulting estimates also underscore the substantial under-reporting that occurs when laboratory-confirmed outcomes are the sole method used to capture hospitalizations and deaths.
So, these are the numbers many media moguls want their media stations to blow out of proportion. As stated above, the CDC stopped reporting on the aforementioned stats, which led to inaccurate numbers. In addition, as with any study, changing the methodology for reporting midstream has the tendency to deliver in false statistics.
Charles Ornstein of ProPublica is correct, H1N1 and COVID-19 are not the same. However, portions of his analysis are misleading.
Where is the news coverage to compare the first two months of each of these viruses? The media is quick to report a year long comparison of H1N1 to two months of COVID-19. As I have learned in all of my statistics courses, you can skew data to tell the story that you want to convey.
ProPublica is supposed to be an INDEPENDENT investigative journalism newsroom. However, I believe that I have supported my claims that they are NOT an independent newsroom. But, do your own analysis and decide.
Until next time...
While some of us fortunate enough to have a company allow us to telework, other families are not that fortunate. These families put their selves at risk everyday to provide a service - be it in retail, salons, restaurants, bars/nightclubs, or the entertainment industries.
The Guardian has shared a podcast from Science Weekly called "COVID-19: How Effective is Social Distancing?" In the podcast, Ian Sample speaks with Professor Deirdre Hollingsworth - an infectious disease modeler from Oxford University. In the podcast, she mentions that in the beginning there is a high peak, but after a big spike, the virus starts to flatten out. She mentions that the whole community is at risk, which makes social distancing an important practice. Pre-symptomatic and post-symptomatic individuals can continue to spread COVID-19 within and outside of their household. Therefore, isolation is beneficial for both your family and the public.
Social distancing has some major social consequences. Individuals could get laid off from work due to patrons not frequenting the establishment. In this case, I would urge those affected by this financially to file for unemployment and to see what alternative options are available to those affected by social distancing.
Some key factors to measure the effectiveness of social distancing is difficult to determine given the incubation period of the virus. This makes the control of the disease very difficult, and makes isolation very important. When the social distancing and isolation controls are lifted there is the chance of a resurgence in COVID-19.
So, what are some effective ways to practice social distancing:
Healthcare workers at an extreme risk of contracting COVID-19 and any other infectious disease. Above all when asked if you are symptomatic or in contact with anyone infected with COVID-19, HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY.
I was in the process of writing my first post on the #1 topic around the world—COVID-19. After reading “Pelosi Begins Drive to Block Trump’s Emergency Declaration” in the New York Times, I decided to switch gears.
After Pelosi’s futile attempt to impeach President Trump and then set her sights on VP Pence, in what I believe was a misguided attempt to become the first female president, she continues to be a profiteer in politics. This time by attempting to block the Republicans’ stimulus package to curb the current economic crisis. Even after President Trump said he would veto such a bold and predictable Pelosi move that would require two-thirds of Congress to override his veto. That is a much taller order for the Demobrats to fill as they will need the support of several Republicans to fall out of rank to accomplish this task. With a doomed attempt at wasting our tax dollars and valuable legislatures’ time away from more pressing issues, Pelosi continues to profiteer in politics.
With a law passed by Congress, it affords the sitting president to take military funding and apply it to a national emergency—such as COVID-19. However, under the National Emergencies Act, Congress has the power to end a national emergency. Last I checked, the national emergency is far from over. While the measure will surely pass in a Demobratic controlled House, the Senate will surely let the measure fail.
What the New York Times article failed to mention was that the Demobrats is making an attempt to slide taxpayer dollars for abortion into the emergency aid bill. A measure that many Republican lawmakers are against. What in the hell does abortion have to do with a stimulus package? That is worse than capping the stimulus checks to only those that made under $100,000 last year. In my opinion, ALL Americans should receive the stimulus check to pour into the economy—whether the person spends it in the economy or puts it into some sort of investment. The only possible way not to spend it in the economy is to not deposit the check, but to cash it and put the money under their mattress.
Ben Sasse said it best, Pelosi should be fighting the coronavirus pandemic, not politicizing emergency funding fighting against the bipartisan Hyde Amendment.
And that my friends is why Pelosi always was and always will be the Profiteer in Politics.
Until next time...