[FRIAM] On the: RLY!? side

Thu Aug 26 12:49:31 EDT 2021

I'm fairly certain *I* never called any person stupid. I don't even think anti-vaxxers are stupid people just because the thoughts they're thinking, and their lack of action is stupid. That Dave conflates calling an anti-vaxer stupid vs. calling an anti-vaxxer's anti-vax stance stupid, indicates something about Dave, not about me.

So, to be clear, being anti-vax is stupid. But the anti-vaxxer that is anti-vax is not (necessarily) stupid. If, however, a given person's actions-thoughts are overwhelmingly stupid, like 90% of their actions and thoughts are stupid actions and stupid thoughts, then it's a reasonable heuristic to skip all the extra words and ball up all their actions and thoughts into the person. I try not to do that. And based on my ability to have calm, civilized discussions with people who yell spittle in my face, I think I do OK at it.

On 8/26/21 9:38 AM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
> I agree, Dave, that calling other people stupid is stupid, even though it is deeply satisfying and great for organizing lynch parties.
> 
>  
> 
> Nick
> 
>  
> 
> Nick Thompson
> 
> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com <mailto:ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com>
> 
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/>
> 
>  
> 
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Prof David West
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 26, 2021 11:28 AM
> *To:* friam at redfish.com
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] On the: RLY!? side
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Glen stated:/"Shun the anti-vax. Stupidity must be painful."/
> 
>  
> 
> Is it correct to interpret this statement: anti-vax equates to stupidity in all cases without exception?
> 
>  
> 
> Such an interpretation would certainly be consistent with the prevailing rhetoric. And it very clearly delineates two groups: Them the stupid and Us the enlightened.
> 
>  
> 
> Am I, for example, stupid; giving no regard to the basis of my being anti-vax, for me personally?
> 
>  
> 
> [BTW, my analytical evaluation and conclusions did not stop me from getting vaccinated despite my antipathy. But my doing so was simply a matter of coercion.]
> 
>  
> 
> davew
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021, at 8:15 AM, uǝlƃ ☤>$ wrote:
> 
>> Any place but the ER is irrelevant. Other paths to hospital inpatient 
> 
>> or PT/allergy/optha clinics *should* require proof of vax or PCR test 
> 
>> results. I agree. Shun the anti-vax. Stupidity must be painful.
> 
>> 
> 
>> But re: ER, I disagree. It's impractical to the point of silliness.
> 
>> 
> 
>> On 8/25/21 10:56 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> 
>> > They aren't under a mandate to have sufficient capacity, or they'd have sufficient capacity.   Through a triage process they can prioritize.   It must happen already, even if it isn't legal.  Oh, the local drug addict is here again.  That guy is probably not #1 for the attention of the doctors.  If enough big organizations like hospitals, grocery stores, etc. simply refuse to patronize people without evidence of vaccination, there doesn't need to be a mandate.   And it isn't just ERs, there are people getting allergy shots, getting physical therapy, eyeglasses adjusted, etc.  No shirt, no shoes, no vaccination, no service.
> 
>> > 
> 
>> > -----Original Message-----
> 
>> > From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com>> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$
> 
>> > Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2021 10:47 AM
> 
>> > To: friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>
> 
>> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] On the: RLY!? side
> 
>> > 
> 
>> > That's just nonsense. By the time you're at the ER, the vaccine is largely irrelevant. Plus, when some 18 year old kid comes in unconscious with a gunshot wound, it's difficult to ask her if she's been vaccinated or not.
> 
>> > 
> 
>> > Anyway, most large hospitals are under a mandate to treat whoever walks in the door, even if they don't have insurance. To make the change you suggest would require major legislative effort and, perhaps, re-architect the laws that govern public medicine. You're not gonna do that anytime soon.
> 
>> > 
> 
>> > Taking a look at this site: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/12/09/944379919/new-data-reveal-which-hospitals-are-dangerously-full-is-yours <https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/12/09/944379919/new-data-reveal-which-hospitals-are-dangerously-full-is-yours>
> 
>> > it seems the ratio of covid patients is actually lower than I thought. The actual problem is insufficient buffer capacity, not the surge in covid patients. The covid patients are simply demonstrating the problem.
> 
>> > 
> 
>> > 
> 
>> > On 8/25/21 9:58 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> 
>> >> Will you consent to a vaccine?  
> 
>> >>
> 
>> >> Yes:  You get treatment for your non-COVID condition.  No:  Get lost.  
> 
>> >>
> 
>> >> -----Original Message-----
> 
>> >> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com>> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$
> 
>> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2021 9:53 AM
> 
>> >> To: friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>
> 
>> >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] On the: RLY!? side
> 
>> >>
> 
>> >> Because the majority of the patients in the ERs are not covid patients. (Last I heard the percentages were around 60-70% are non-covid. But I'm sure it's location dependent.) They're regular people with regular problems, many of whom delayed medical treatments for a year due to lockdowns. We did a little too much "just in time" logistical planning with our hospitals and this fairly tiny bump is demonstrating that our buffer wasn't high enough.
> 
>> >>
> 
>> >> The smart thing to do is increase capacity, correct the buffer size, and take care of both covid patients and regular people.
> 
>> >>
> 
>> >>
> 
>> >> On 8/25/21 9:33 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> 
>> >>> Why should we increase the capacity of the hospitals?  Just don't let them in.
> 
>> >>>
> 
>> >>> -----Original Message-----
> 
>> >>> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com>> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$
> 
>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2021 9:25 AM
> 
>> >>> To: friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>
> 
>> >>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] On the: RLY!? side
> 
>> >>>
> 
>> >>> Well, only if you don't make a big stink out of it. If it's a normal, everyday thing, yeah sure. But if it's some litmus test for who's with us or who's against us, then they're much less willing to submit to such tests.
> 
>> >>>
> 
>> >>> You see this in spades w.r.t. to the protests. In Portland, they antifa are rigorous about staging counter protests, which makes the fascists dig in and be more committed to protesting, which makes the antifa more committed, ad infinitum. Here in Olympia, it's mostly just the fascists out there protesting mask and vaccine mandates. (Yes, irony is dead.) But as a result, they're anticlimactic and peter out pretty comfortably.
> 
>> >>>
> 
>> >>> Along the same lines of "don't feed the troll", if we focused our attention on increasing the capacities of hospitals rather than brow beating the anti-vaxers, I suspect the vax rate would climb steadily and the reactionary tendencies of the anti-vaxers would abate.
> 
>> >>>
> 
>> >>>
> 
>> >>> On 8/25/21 9:09 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> 
>> >>>> These same people are willing to submit to an employer's drug tests.
> 

-- 
☤>$ uǝlƃ