Offside Chat Archives (2014-2021)

The Italians really messed this up. And I mean, they blew it big time. It’s even seeped into their oncology wards... they’ve got something like 2,000 medical staff members infected.

And so we're left with what we have. Unfortunately.

urbanhawk17 said:Exactly.

For now, we can really only talk about hospitalization rates. It’s true the Corona death rate jumped from 3.4% to 4% in about ten days, but it’s still lower than the flu (and honestly, hospitalization counts are the only thing that matters right now).

Claiming Corona is 30 times more lethal is just irresponsible, even if it comes from Vekjo.☕

@Jacob Kern2 makes a good point. We should probably isolate the elderly and keep them from going out. I guess Vučić is actually right on this one.

I find myself genuinely wondering how this landscape will look in a month's time, once people realize that all these lockdowns might prove nearly futile against a virus that refuses to vanish. The scientific community seems largely in agreement that we cannot simply eradicate it, often citing the necessity of herd immunity, yet we continue to shutter everything in sight. One must consider the fate of the thousands who will lose their livelihoods, or the emergence of secondary health crises triggered by extreme stress and economic hardship—issues that could ultimately leave the most vulnerable without even a roof over their heads. All of this stems from a virus that, according to current projections, may only reach about 20% of the total population, many of whom will experience nothing more than mild symptoms.

It is easy to play the strategist once the dust has settled, but considering the massive amount of revenue the United States will undoubtedly lose, I believe we would have been five times better off if we had allocated a portion of those funds toward supporting the seniors who need to stay home. We could have invested in delivery services for food, water, and medication, or perhaps even provided temporary housing for those living in multi-generational households until the situation stabilizes.

To me, this mounting hysteria feels increasingly like Sladoljev was right, much like when he voiced his skepticism during the swine flu era. If we hadn't branded this specific illness as "coronavirus" and given it its own unique identity, it likely would have slipped under the radar just like dozens of other viruses that have historically been lumped in with the flu.

ruggedjackal46 said:What an absolute ace.🙏

I mean, seriously, where did Vučić even find this guy? Did he just pluck him out of some random flower shop in New York?

He actually looks a bit like Number 1🙏

ruggedjackal46 said:What an absolute ace.🙏

I mean, seriously, where did Vučić even find this guy? Did he just pluck him out of some random flower shop in New York?

He’s having a hell of a run with these doctors lately—first that "expert" regarding the Facebook virus, and now this Alan Ford fellow...

Nobody's born without an expiration date, man.

Jacob Kern2 said:I find myself genuinely wondering how this landscape will look in a month's time, once people realize that all these lockdowns might prove nearly futile against a virus that refuses to vanish. The scientific community seems largely in agreement that we cannot simply eradicate it, often citing the necessity of herd immunity, yet we continue to shutter everything in sight. One must consider the fate of the thousands who will lose their livelihoods, or the emergence of secondary health crises triggered by extreme stress and economic hardship—issues that could ultimately leave the most vulnerable without even a roof over their heads. All of this stems from a virus that, according to current projections, may only reach about 20% of the total population, many of whom will experience nothing more than mild symptoms.

It is easy to play the strategist once the dust has settled, but considering the massive amount of revenue the United States will undoubtedly lose, I believe we would have been five times better off if we had allocated a portion of those funds toward supporting the seniors who need to stay home. We could have invested in delivery services for food, water, and medication, or perhaps even provided temporary housing for those living in multi-generational households until the situation stabilizes.

To me, this mounting hysteria feels increasingly like Sladoljev was right, much like when he voiced his skepticism during the swine flu era. If we hadn't branded this specific illness as "coronavirus" and given it its own unique identity, it likely would have slipped under the radar just like dozens of other viruses that have historically been lumped in with the flu.

I guess I'm leaning in that same direction too. 😉

Jacob Kern2 said:I find myself genuinely wondering how this landscape will look in a month's time, once people realize that all these lockdowns might prove nearly futile against a virus that refuses to vanish. The scientific community seems largely in agreement that we cannot simply eradicate it, often citing the necessity of herd immunity, yet we continue to shutter everything in sight. One must consider the fate of the thousands who will lose their livelihoods, or the emergence of secondary health crises triggered by extreme stress and economic hardship—issues that could ultimately leave the most vulnerable without even a roof over their heads. All of this stems from a virus that, according to current projections, may only reach about 20% of the total population, many of whom will experience nothing more than mild symptoms.

It is easy to play the strategist once the dust has settled, but considering the massive amount of revenue the United States will undoubtedly lose, I believe we would have been five times better off if we had allocated a portion of those funds toward supporting the seniors who need to stay home. We could have invested in delivery services for food, water, and medication, or perhaps even provided temporary housing for those living in multi-generational households until the situation stabilizes.

To me, this mounting hysteria feels increasingly like Sladoljev was right, much like when he voiced his skepticism during the swine flu era. If we hadn't branded this specific illness as "coronavirus" and given it its own unique identity, it likely would have slipped under the radar just like dozens of other viruses that have historically been lumped in with the flu.

I honestly worry we’ll be asking these same questions again when the next crisis hits, like an environmental catastrophe. Instead of just scrambling to keep the status quo running, maybe we should be figuring out how to make our entire system flexible enough to handle these shocks. Like, how can we implement quick quarantines without breaking society? How can the government actually step up to support the people getting crushed by these measures? If we had those safety nets ready to go, Covid wouldn't be such a massive headache right now. I just hope that next time—and let's face it, it *will* happen—we aren't stuck dealing with politicians playing games, citizens acting oblivious, and regulations that show up two months too late.

Paul Sanders5 said:Nobody's born without an expiration date, man.

Death comes for us all eventually...

Life is 100% mortal, except for those actually living it.

It seems that those who grind themselves to the bone and those who sit around doing absolutely nothing all meet the same end eventually...

Amanda Evans2 said:He’s having a hell of a run with these doctors lately—first that "expert" regarding the Facebook virus, and now this Alan Ford fellow...

I was born, yet I haven't died.

ambertinker41 said:Hmm...
Paul Martinez73 is just playing with percentages.

🤣🤣

ambertinker41 said:Hmm...
Paul Martinez73 is just playing with percentages.

Eric Fox7 said:Nah, you don't calculate the percentage like that 🤦

Matthew Young35 said:Actually, that wouldn't be 10%; it would be 9.09%.

But then again, the raw data itself is double-edged.

nimblemarlin9 said:🤣🤣

I see you guys are being just as serious as Vučić... ☕
I wanted to point out first that we're talking about 30% here, which is actually three times higher than the flu, you know... You can clearly see the old man is demanding links for proof. ☕

The mortality rate isn't anywhere near 3%—not when everyone who dies gets lumped into the stats, and as someone already pointed out, a huge chunk of those infected aren't even being counted. I mean, believing there were only 80 cases here after doctors were interacting with dozens of people daily—every single one of those infected was out there somewhere, touching things, sneezing...

Cut me some slack if I say there aren't at least 1,000 people in the US today dealing with mild or zero symptoms. My old man had all the classic signs at the end of January—about three weeks of unexplained fever, a cough, just feeling wiped out. They tested him for various infections and did lung scans—nothing showed up. Who's to say this virus didn't hit the States long before we actually started testing and tracking the situation? Half these cases probably just got misdiagnosed as the flu.

Look, politicians can be a real mixed bag, but Beroš is actually doing a solid job—I wouldn’t go so far as to say he’s perfect, but he’s definitely hitting the mark. He comes across as someone who actually knows his stuff, understands the complexities of the situation, offers actual solutions, and—thankfully—doesn't just try to trigger a mass panic.

Honestly, the mere thought of what things would look like if Kujundžić had stayed in that minister role gives me the chills.🤦

Kujo would have absolutely crushed that...

Yeah, just like how he handled the credit card 🤣

Instead of being based in the USA, he’d probably set up shop right there in the front yard
It is known

I guess Kujundžić would probably suggest some old-school home remedy to deal with Covid, maybe a big bowl of hearty stew, plenty of garlic, and some red wine.☕

When it comes to how the system is running, I’ve got nothing but praise so far. The Secretary is absolutely killing it.