Offside Chat Archives (2014-2021)

mellowotter36 said:Honestly, maybe we should just let urbanhawk17, Anthony Jackson2, and Paul Sanders5 handle the measures to stop this virus. I have this gut feeling they might actually be better epidemiologists than the professionals who have spent their entire lives studying this.

Look, I'm no expert, so I'm definitely not going to second-guess the medical pros. I’ll just point out one thing: those people who were looking to get out of places like Washington, D.C. already made their move last week (I was right there with them). So, I really wonder if these new rules will even achieve what they're aiming for.

And then there's that guy who couldn't care less whether a thousand people end up suffocating in a hospital hallway...

Epidemiologists who have never faced a pandemic of this magnitude—all while having Božinović and Plenković sitting above them in the chain of command, dictating their every move? 🙂

Amanda Evans2 said:Look, forgive me if you disagree, but some people just think differently. They look at the big picture from every possible angle, they question everything, and they don't take anyone's word at face value.
Then there are others—actually, there are quite a few of them—who crave total state control and draconian restrictions on movement. Personally, I can't stand that. Hiding away at home and waiting for the storm to pass...
To me, freedom matters more than living like an insect trapped in a shell. For some, survival is the only priority, and they couldn't care less about liberty. As long as I make it through, that's all they care about.
All this hysteria exists because everyone is just terrified for their own skin, rather than staying home out of a genuine concern for protecting the elderly.

Hmm, can you really predict what things will look like three months from now, when not only will the grocery store shelves be empty,
but you won't even have the money to buy anything, and the entire system collapses under its own paralysis?

Laura Chavez93 said:Epidemiologists who have never faced a pandemic of this magnitude—all while having Božinović and Plenković sitting above them in the chain of command, dictating their every move? 🙂

Hmm, can you really predict what things will look like three months from now, when not only will the grocery store shelves be empty,
but you won't even have the money to buy anything, and the entire system collapses under its own paralysis?

That is exactly my point. But fine, let’s all stay locked in our houses if it makes everyone feel safer and keeps our hides covered.
At the same time, a buddy of mine—a surgeon over at the Mayo Clinic—is telling me they’ve already lost a significantly higher number of patients because they couldn't perform necessary surgeries due to this hysteria, far more than what the Coronavirus has actually killed in the US so far...

ruggedjackal46 said:Everyone seems perfectly fine with a few thousand people dying, as long as those people aren't us, our families, or our friends. 🙄

While I’m trying my best to be considerate of everything surrounding this new virus—and I’ll be the first to admit my own perspective on how serious this situation is has shifted quite a bit over the last month—I still can't help but notice a certain level of absurdity. There seems to be a significant disconnect between the raw data and the sweeping restrictions being implemented globally.

Yes, every single human life is priceless, but let's be honest: hundreds of thousands of people pass away every single day across the globe.

I find myself wondering what would happen if, every time we picked up our phones or turned on the TV, we were met with live counters showing deaths from every possible cause—from the common flu to smoking, alcohol, or just about anything else you can imagine. We're talking about numbers that dwarf the ones currently making headlines.

For instance, you could technically prevent every single traffic fatality just as effectively by banning everyone from leaving their houses and having the police intervene the moment they see someone sitting in a car. At the end of the day, those are also someone's family, friends, or neighbors.

Then there’s the inevitable argument regarding hospital capacity, which I respect, but let’s not forget that here in the States, we have waiting lists that stretch out for YEARS for basic medical screenings. In that waiting period, more people will likely die than will ever succumb to Coronavirus.

Take a moderate earthquake, for example. If the damage is limited to cracks in old facades and historic churches, and we only need to find housing for about a hundred people in town and half of the local HOSPITALS—which, frankly, are some of the most dilapidated buildings in the country—then the situation is nothing short of insane and SCANDALOUS.
I highly doubt the economy is going to grind to a halt just so we can build twenty brand-new medical facilities to replace these crumbling structures that are a safety hazard even during peaceful times.

I don't know; it all feels like a global chain reaction of panic-driven policies. Given the nature of the virus, I don't see any other way out than eventually coming to terms with its existence, filing it away alongside all the other diseases that claim lives, and slowly returning to business as usual.

I'm not necessarily trying to make a grand point, and I am personally following all the guidelines, but there it is—just my two cents. 🤷

Amanda Evans2 said:Look, forgive me if you disagree, but some people just think differently. They look at the big picture from every possible angle, they question everything, and they don't take anyone's word at face value.
Then there are others—actually, there are quite a few of them—who crave total state control and draconian restrictions on movement. Personally, I can't stand that. Hiding away at home and waiting for the storm to pass...
To me, freedom matters more than living like an insect trapped in a shell. For some, survival is the only priority, and they couldn't care less about liberty. As long as I make it through, that's all they care about.
All this hysteria exists because everyone is just terrified for their own skin, rather than staying home out of a genuine concern for protecting the elderly.

Look, freedom isn't just a free pass; it comes with responsibilities. It’s pretty straightforward, even if some people only seem to care about the perks. During a pandemic, anyone can be a carrier, so there's a basic expectation that you look out for the person next to you.
The US is basically the poster child for individual liberty—you can be a redneck in a local militia, a total neo-Nazi idiot, or an extreme liberal for all I care—but when New Orleans gets hit by a hurricane, the National Guard gets the green light to shoot looters.
Common sense should be enough.

Sure, the spin that people are only looking out for themselves instead of the elderly and vulnerable might have a grain of truth to it, but it feels incredibly hypocritical coming from the very people who would probably be spreading the virus themselves. I bet those types act like saints when it comes to "protecting" the vulnerable.

It reminds me of that old argument that entrepreneurs only care about their own bottom line. Well, good morning, Sherlock. They aren't pulling twelve-hour shifts just to satisfy some philosophy major; they work hard because they want to stack cash, but in doing so, they actually benefit society by creating jobs and paying taxes.
It's the same logic here: those people looking out for their own interests are, by extension, looking out for everyone else too.

Wouldn't it be a more logical solution—simply put—to isolate the vulnerable population?

So, looking at Sweden, it seems they haven't slapped any bans on anything yet. Schools are still open, everything’s just running as usual. Honestly, we'll have to wait and see how this whole situation plays out over there.

Laura Chavez93 said:Wouldn't it be a more logical solution—simply put—to isolate the vulnerable population?

Honestly, the real headache here is that this virus seems specifically designed to make a huge chunk of the population dependent on ventilators just to hang on. They might survive, sure, but the massive issue is that we simply don't have enough respirators or medical staff to go around. In plain English, we’d likely see quite a few young people passing away simply because they couldn't get a timely response from the healthcare system.

They always tell you that during flu season, everyone is bumping into the virus, but some people just don't catch it because they have better immunity, they got their shots, or they're just naturally tougher—but it feels like absolutely nothing is working for us here.

Eat my dust, maybe we'll finally see a counter-reaction ☕

Paul Sanders5 said:So, looking at Sweden, it seems they haven't slapped any bans on anything yet. Schools are still open, everything’s just running as usual. Honestly, we'll have to wait and see how this whole situation plays out over there.

Yeah, they’re basically following that logic where they claim the kids aren't at risk, so it's better to just let them power through it. We'll see how that works out.

Charles Chase4 said:While I’m trying my best to be considerate of everything surrounding this new virus—and I’ll be the first to admit my own perspective on how serious this situation is has shifted quite a bit over the last month—I still can't help but notice a certain level of absurdity. There seems to be a significant disconnect between the raw data and the sweeping restrictions being implemented globally.

Yes, every single human life is priceless, but let's be honest: hundreds of thousands of people pass away every single day across the globe.

I find myself wondering what would happen if, every time we picked up our phones or turned on the TV, we were met with live counters showing deaths from every possible cause—from the common flu to smoking, alcohol, or just about anything else you can imagine. We're talking about numbers that dwarf the ones currently making headlines.

For instance, you could technically prevent every single traffic fatality just as effectively by banning everyone from leaving their houses and having the police intervene the moment they see someone sitting in a car. At the end of the day, those are also someone's family, friends, or neighbors.

Then there’s the inevitable argument regarding hospital capacity, which I respect, but let’s not forget that here in the States, we have waiting lists that stretch out for YEARS for basic medical screenings. In that waiting period, more people will likely die than will ever succumb to Coronavirus.

Take a moderate earthquake, for example. If the damage is limited to cracks in old facades and historic churches, and we only need to find housing for about a hundred people in town and half of the local HOSPITALS—which, frankly, are some of the most dilapidated buildings in the country—then the situation is nothing short of insane and SCANDALOUS.
I highly doubt the economy is going to grind to a halt just so we can build twenty brand-new medical facilities to replace these crumbling structures that are a safety hazard even during peaceful times.

I don't know; it all feels like a global chain reaction of panic-driven policies. Given the nature of the virus, I don't see any other way out than eventually coming to terms with its existence, filing it away alongside all the other diseases that claim lives, and slowly returning to business as usual.

I'm not necessarily trying to make a grand point, and I am personally following all the guidelines, but there it is—just my two cents. 🤷

Look, I basically agree with you on almost everything, except for the part about the hospitals.
Doctors and nurses are among—I won't say the most vulnerable, but potentially the biggest carriers for spreading the infection. And frankly, we were facing a shortage of medical staff long before any of this started.
Beyond that, the mass hysteria caused a situation where people with Coronavirus got priority treatment, leaving certain critically ill patients without the urgent care they actually needed. The earthquake in Washington, D.C., and the fact that some wards or entire hospitals were non-functional just compounded the problem.
Honestly, I worry more about patients hospitalized for cancer or other malignant diseases than I do about a few thousand thirty-year-olds catching the virus.
And as a father of a three-year-old, I had to laugh when someone wrote that we needed a pandemic just to realize that our social lives are technically called "quarantine." 😁

ironpanther5 said:Honestly, the real headache here is that this virus seems specifically designed to make a huge chunk of the population dependent on ventilators just to hang on. They might survive, sure, but the massive issue is that we simply don't have enough respirators or medical staff to go around. In plain English, we’d likely see quite a few young people passing away simply because they couldn't get a timely response from the healthcare system.

They always tell you that during flu season, everyone is bumping into the virus, but some people just don't catch it because they have better immunity, they got their shots, or they're just naturally tougher—but it feels like absolutely nothing is working for us here.

So, what is the solution then? Boost everyone's immunity? Or should we tell retirees—who fall into that high-risk category—that they aren't allowed to leave their houses? And what about those with chronic illnesses?

So, after they finally slapped those strict quarantine measures in place—which, let's be real, they should've done over a month ago—the number of people catching the Coronavirus in Italy is actually starting to drop. So yeah, turns out quarantine actually works.

ironpanther5 said:Honestly, the real headache here is that this virus seems specifically designed to make a huge chunk of the population dependent on ventilators just to hang on. They might survive, sure, but the massive issue is that we simply don't have enough respirators or medical staff to go around. In plain English, we’d likely see quite a few young people passing away simply because they couldn't get a timely response from the healthcare system.

They always tell you that during flu season, everyone is bumping into the virus, but some people just don't catch it because they have better immunity, they got their shots, or they're just naturally tougher—but it feels like absolutely nothing is working for us here.

But look at our numbers—out of over 300 hospitalized, only 6 are on ventilators.
hospitalized.
As someone who isn't a medical professional, that doesn't strike me as a catastrophic figure, but please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

wiredfalcon2 said:So, after they finally slapped those strict quarantine measures in place—which, let's be real, they should've done over a month ago—the number of people catching the Coronavirus in Italy is actually starting to drop. So yeah, turns out quarantine actually works.

Well, nobody was exactly expecting anything else here. We are talking about the fundamental necessity of movement controls and quarantine protocols themselves.
Someone above wrote that we might as well just ban driving altogether to see if that produces results too, bringing that death toll of 300 in traffic accidents down to zero...

Amanda Evans2 said:But look at our numbers—out of over 300 hospitalized, only 6 are on ventilators.
hospitalized.
As someone who isn't a medical professional, that doesn't strike me as a catastrophic figure, but please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Sure, but we have a much younger population getting infected right now. Plus, we're talking about two percent here. Just imagine if 500,000 people caught it—that would be 10,000 people needing a ventilator. And we only have about 500 to 1,000 available. I mean, obviously, they won't all need one at the exact same second, but you see my point, right? What kind of nightmare scenario would that actually be?

If I’m reading this correctly, there are only about 39 people actually stuck in a hospital bed; everyone else is just chilling at home because they feel fine.

Until recently, I was pretty much handling things without a second thought, thinking the danger from the Coronavirus was negligible compared to the absolute avalanche of hysteria sweeping through everything. Then, I went out for a drink with a lifelong friend of mine—someone I’ve known forever who happens to be a doctor and a top-tier specialist, and honestly, one of the smartest, most rational people I’ve ever met. His take alone was enough to make me rethink my stance; he made it clear this isn't some joke, and that the situation is genuinely serious and dangerous, not just for the elderly. Now, I'm not saying he's 100% right, or that it won't turn out to be all unnecessary once this blows over—which is what I'm hoping for, obviously—but since I don't exactly have the expertise to make an informed assessment myself, I think I'll just defer to the opinion of someone I actually trust.

honestly, the administration is handling this pretty well 👍

Amanda Evans2 said:Well, nobody was exactly expecting anything else here. We are talking about the fundamental necessity of movement controls and quarantine protocols themselves.
Someone above wrote that we might as well just ban driving altogether to see if that produces results too, bringing that death toll of 300 in traffic accidents down to zero...

I dig the way you brought up traffic accidents. Let's be real: accidents happen because idiots get behind the wheel drunk or drive like maniacs. It’s the exact same thing as how this virus spreads—because of idiots who can't follow basic self-isolation rules. In both scenarios, the common denominator is just plain stupidity. If we had tighter controls and harsher penalties on the road, those death tolls would tank. Imagine if your car had built-in GPS tracking that hard-coded your speed limits. You wouldn't be able to go over 31 miles mph in the city or 50 miles mph on the highway because the car literally won't let you. Fatalities would plummet. But instead of being mad at the morons, people would be out there screaming at the government for "restricting their freedom" to speed. That's your quarantine analogy right there.

wiredfalcon2 said:I dig the way you brought up traffic accidents. Let's be real: accidents happen because idiots get behind the wheel drunk or drive like maniacs. It’s the exact same thing as how this virus spreads—because of idiots who can't follow basic self-isolation rules. In both scenarios, the common denominator is just plain stupidity. If we had tighter controls and harsher penalties on the road, those death tolls would tank. Imagine if your car had built-in GPS tracking that hard-coded your speed limits. You wouldn't be able to go over 31 miles mph in the city or 50 miles mph on the highway because the car literally won't let you. Fatalities would plummet. But instead of being mad at the morons, people would be out there screaming at the government for "restricting their freedom" to speed. That's your quarantine analogy right there.

This has become the standard discourse over the last few days.
The narrative is that anyone opposing a total lockdown is just as much of an idiot as a drunk driver speeding through a red light.
There are people mandated to isolate, and then there are everyone else.
Those judgmental glares you get when you step out for a walk just because someone else is terrified for their own skin—it's this pervasive, omnipresent hysteria. It’s a brand of hysteria fueled by a public discourse that is obsessed with nothing but body counts and infection numbers...

nimblemarlin9 said:honestly, the administration is handling this pretty well 👍

And then Horvat chimed in too:

I mean, honestly, carrying around debt that’s actually larger than everything you own... it's just a heavy way to live, isn't it? It feels like you're constantly running uphill in a sandstorm while everyone else is cruising on a paved highway, and I'm not even being dramatic when I say it eats away at your peace of mind. You start looking at every little purchase, even something small like a coffee or a quick lunch, and instead of just enjoying the moment, you're doing this mental math in the back of your head about interest rates and how much more you owe than what you actually have in the bank. It's a suffocating cycle, really, because once you're underwater like that, the math stops feeling like numbers on a screen and starts feeling like a weight sitting right on your chest, making it impossible to breathe easy or plan for anything real in the future. $67 Honestly, if you ask me, when you look at what the IRS is doing, I really think those kinds of entrepreneurs need to take a long, hard look in the mirror and seriously question what all of this actually signifies for their own business models.

Right now, we’re looking at this massive wave of entrepreneurship hitting the scene, but honestly, I can already see what's coming this fall—it's going to be a total meltdown driven by all those bureaucratic parasites and government cronies who only exist to suck up resources. Once state revenue inevitably drops by 30 or 40%, things are going to get ugly fast, and we'll just see everyone turning on each other in a desperate scramble, which isn't exactly going to be some soothing balm for all the business owners facing bankruptcy.

Honestly, I wouldn't even feel bad about going personally bankrupt if it meant getting to see those smug faces fall apart once they finally realize the money is gone for good.