chaparral
chaparral Dork
1/26/21 8:43 a.m.

In reply to trigun7469 :

We're currently vaccinating 1.5 million per day, so "a while" might be "a week"

trigun7469
trigun7469 SuperDork
1/26/21 9:10 a.m.

In reply to chaparral :

10.8 Million in PA, not sure what 1.5 million breaksdown state wise.

volvoclearinghouse
volvoclearinghouse PowerDork
1/26/21 10:02 a.m.

In reply to wae :

That's one of the more nuanced, thoughtful, insightful, and unbiased things I've read.  Thanks.

WilD
WilD Dork
1/26/21 10:12 a.m.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:

The CDC says 20,537,999 doses have been administered, and 41,411,550 have been distributed.  
 

At the local level, health departments are saying they are running out. 
 

Where are the doses?

Good question.  There are clearly some issues with distribution of the vaccine.  The City of Detroit is well into phase 1B, while the surrounding counties have yet to begin phase 1B and keep saying they "hope to overcome the vaccines shortfalls and begin soon".  This is causing no little anxiety for folks like my wife who are supposed to return to in person education on March 1st.  That decision was made when the state government annouced phase 1B was beginning the first week in January.  If people feel like we do in thise house, people are pissed.

chaparral
chaparral Dork
1/26/21 11:53 a.m.

In reply to trigun7469 :

It looks like Pennsylvania is vaccinating 250k per week right now, so with a constant number of doses per week you'd get it in November.

Constant per-week doesn't appear to be the case. Bloomberg's graphs show national doses accelerating from 500k per day on Jan 10 (7 day rolling average) to 750k per day on January 17, to 1.2M per day on January 24. If they can hold up that linear growth, the number of people vaccinated will go up quadratically!

If we are to get 500M doses out by the 4th of July we'll need to get to 4-5M per day by April. 

trigun7469
trigun7469 SuperDork
1/26/21 3:27 p.m.

In reply to chaparral :

What WilD mentioned above is my concern that Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and Harrisburg are receiving them at a accelerated rate (statistically will look good because of the bigger population) while smaller cities like mine ranked 4 or 5 get the table scraps. Most of the PA politics works like that. We aren't even close to phase 1B, I can't even get a answer if I am eligible for Phase 1B I work at a school but am not a teacher. Friend of mine is a accountant at a health facility and received it, so I assumed I am Phase 1B? November 2021 is what my employer forecasted in May, not a knock of current or past administration, but just the reality of how the game works.

mtn (Forum Supporter)
mtn (Forum Supporter) MegaDork
1/26/21 3:34 p.m.

Potential flounder here, but I think this is a tremendous idea: Law maker suggests $1,400 stimulus for those who get vaccine. I'd suggest doing it as a 2021 tax credit, awarded when taxes are due in April 2022 to get around the availability issue. 

RevRico
RevRico UltimaDork
1/26/21 3:39 p.m.

In reply to trigun7469 :

There was a county school board meeting here 2 weeks ago, superintendents from all the schools in Westmoreland county.

"You're on the list, but we don't know when, could be March, could be June"

Not 3 days later, the 2 richest school districts in the county magically had found doses for all their teachers, but no one else even seems to have a clue when they might be eligible.

From what I'm hearing, as has been the case this entire time, there is a MASSIVE communication gap between the governor and health secretary and the school systems. Their constant flip flopping has not helped matters either. I'm sure our health secretary getting pulled for a federal position is really going to help the way the state is responding too.

 

Purple Frog (Forum Supporter)
Purple Frog (Forum Supporter) HalfDork
1/26/21 5:23 p.m.

Got my first dose of Moderna today.     They auto-scheduled the second dose.

I got on three lists about three weeks ago.  (My doctor and two different county health departments)  Then last week called a hospital in Southern Georgia.  No wait on the phone, scheduled for 5 days later.   Incredible professional operation today.  From my car, through the facility, and back to my car; I did not have to touch anything.

Archbald Thomasville had like 6 nurses averaging 25 to 30 shots per hour.  Nothing but compliments to their operation.

Many of my neighbors have found that calling rural health departments is the fast track.  Might take a hour drive.  I don't know if the rural people are hesitant or what.  Can't explain it.  I notice that states like South Dakota and West Virginia are out-performing urban states.

volvoclearinghouse
volvoclearinghouse PowerDork
1/26/21 7:54 p.m.
mtn (Forum Supporter) said:

Potential flounder here, but I think this is a tremendous idea: Law maker suggests $1,400 stimulus for those who get vaccine. I'd suggest doing it as a 2021 tax credit, awarded when taxes are due in April 2022 to get around the availability issue. 

Thats a terrible idea. My first thought on reading that was, "if the shot's so good, why do they have to bribe people to take it?". Seems like it'll only reward people who would get it anyway, and make everyone who was hesitant -more- suspicious.

bigdaddylee82
bigdaddylee82 UberDork
1/26/21 9:35 p.m.

I got the 1st Moderna shot about 2:15 this afternoon.

I took 4 ibuprofen as a precaution about 4:00, based on advice of some medial friends. So far I feel a little like someone punched my arm.

No other side effects, maybe a slight urge to buy more Microsoft products.

bobzilla
bobzilla MegaDork
1/27/21 6:59 a.m.

In reply to volvoclearinghouse :

this. If its a stimulus for the people, it needs to be for all the people. 

SVreX (Forum Supporter)
SVreX (Forum Supporter) MegaDork
1/27/21 7:04 a.m.

I don't have a problem if a stimulus is not for everyone. A targeted stimulus designed to encourage certain sectors of the population is ok if necessary.
 

But using it as a bribe is not ok. 

bobzilla
bobzilla MegaDork
1/27/21 7:11 a.m.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:

I don't have a problem if a stimulus is not for everyone. A targeted stimulus designed to encourage certain sectors of the population is ok if necessary.
 

But using it as a bribe is not ok. 

ok, that's more of what I was going for but its early. Not enough caffeine flowing through the veins yet.

tester (Forum Supporter)
tester (Forum Supporter) Reader
1/27/21 7:16 a.m.

The hospitals here in South Carolina are scheduling specific days for folks 70 and over to get the vaccine.  
 

I suggest going to your local hospital system website to find scheduling information if you live in South Carolina. 
 

 

wae
wae UberDork
1/27/21 7:22 a.m.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:

I don't have a problem if a stimulus is not for everyone. A targeted stimulus designed to encourage certain sectors of the population is ok if necessary.
 

But using it as a bribe is not ok. 

I agree with you, but if I may play the Devil's advocate for a moment....  I don't know what they're calling these latest ones, but in the past they've couched "stimulus checks" in terms of being advances on tax refunds or tax rebates or something along those lines.  And we do have an established pattern of leveraging our tax system as a way to, in effect, bribe people to do what we think they should do.  For example, we allow deductions for charitable contributions, deductions for home mortgage interest, credits for purchasing certain things, and maybe even add on a tax if you decide that you don't want to purchase certain things. 

Because of that, I don't think one would need to torture logic too badly to say that having a large portion of the population take the vaccine is a good that the government should encourage and by offering a "pre-filing tax rebate" to those that go get the shot would be justified in the same way that would justify offering a tax discount for borrowing money to purchase a home.

 

mtn (Forum Supporter)
mtn (Forum Supporter) MegaDork
1/27/21 7:22 a.m.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:

I don't have a problem if a stimulus is not for everyone. A targeted stimulus designed to encourage certain sectors of the population is ok if necessary.
 

But using it as a bribe is not ok. 

Why not? I'd argue a stimulus is already a bribe, to vote for one nitwit over another. 

Maybe stimulus isn't the right word. Maybe bribe is. But I'd be ok with that, at least we'd be getting a discernable benefit from the "aid package" in that way. If people want to let their ill-founded beliefs stop them from getting $1,400, or whatever it would be, let them. I want to get out of this hell as fast as possible - which is getting as many people vaccinated as quickly as possible. 

It'll never happen though.

bobzilla
bobzilla MegaDork
1/27/21 7:31 a.m.

They way the current climate is on shouting down any dissenting opinions on anything at this point, my trust in the science, philosophy and actions of the people pushing this has completely disappeared. If we were still allowed to have an actual conversation about the pros/cons and the reality of this whole situation instead of the instant shout down and labeling as an uneducated anti-(insert current trendy word) it would go a helluva lot farther for people like me in the middle. But that's never going to happen now.

When you're brought up to question everything fed to you by the gov't/media/etc, not because you should't trust but because you should find the whys/hows/what of the situation and make your own conclusions, this current shout down attitude is a little.... unnerving. I don't want to live in an echo chamber. I want different ideas discussed and respected. Defending your thoughts is the best way to validate them to not only yourself but your peers. 

SVreX (Forum Supporter)
SVreX (Forum Supporter) MegaDork
1/27/21 7:38 a.m.

In reply to tester (Forum Supporter) :

Thanks for the tip

mtn (Forum Supporter)
mtn (Forum Supporter) MegaDork
1/27/21 7:57 a.m.
bobzilla said:

They way the current climate is on shouting down any dissenting opinions on anything at this point, my trust in the science, philosophy and actions of the people pushing this has completely disappeared. If we were still allowed to have an actual conversation about the pros/cons and the reality of this whole situation instead of the instant shout down and labeling as an uneducated anti-(insert current trendy word) it would go a helluva lot farther for people like me in the middle. But that's never going to happen now.

When you're brought up to question everything fed to you by the gov't/media/etc, not because you should't trust but because you should find the whys/hows/what of the situation and make your own conclusions, this current shout down attitude is a little.... unnerving. I don't want to live in an echo chamber. I want different ideas discussed and respected. Defending your thoughts is the best way to validate them to not only yourself but your peers. 

 

Ok Bob, lets have a conversation. Can you show me a source that is peer reviewed that has any reason not to get the vaccine at this point? Talking about the products themselves - not the politics or finances of the companies that produce them. I've not seen any. And I've looked. I've spent hours looking. The only thing that comes up is if you're at risk of allergies/anaphylactic shock, pregnant, or have had Covid in the past 90 days. You're more at risk of having an injury or death from driving to get the vaccine than you are from the vaccine.

 

Alternatively, can you show me a faster, cheaper, and safer way of getting out of this hell than widespread vaccine utilization? 

SVreX (Forum Supporter)
SVreX (Forum Supporter) MegaDork
1/27/21 7:59 a.m.

In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :

I agree that stimulus checks and tax breaks are all essentially bribes. 

If the purpose is to be an economic stimulus, then it shouldn't be offered as a healthcare bait-and-switch. Yes, I understand that a case can be made that vaccines help the economy. It doesn't change the subversive nature of the approach. The stimulus should be transparent. 
 

The bigger problem is how vastly and grossly it would cross into violating people's control and personal choices about their individual health care. My choice to take the vaccine is between me and my doctor. Keep the politics out of it. It may even cross the lines for HIPAA.
 

Additionally, it de-legitimizes the concerns some people have about the vaccine. They are a small minority, but they have an ABSOLUTE RIGHT to their concerns about taking a vaccine that has not been tested in the long term, or approved by the FDA. When you call them "ill-founded beliefs", you are revealing your own biases, and attempting to delegitimization legitimate concerns and quiet discussion that is contrary to your personal beliefs. That's not cool. 
 

And lastly, it's completely unnecessary, ineffective, and impossible. The vast majority of people WANT the vaccine, and can't get it because it's not available. So don't worry. It's a self- correcting problem. By the time the system can deliver enough vaccines, most of the concerns will be addressed. Why punish people for political gains?  Some groups of people (like African Americans) have a history of the US government using them as medical guinea pigs- why shouldn't they be suspicious?  Some of these folks are the SAME people who MOST need the stimulus.  Why would you withhold their desperately needed stimulus unless they submitted to being violated by being vaccinated with something they are fearful of?
 

It's a terrible idea. 

SVreX (Forum Supporter)
SVreX (Forum Supporter) MegaDork
1/27/21 8:01 a.m.

In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :

That's not a conversation. It's a dare. A challenge. 
 

You are asking Bob to prove you wrong, instead of just listening to his perspective and legitimately considering it. 

SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :

That's not a conversation. It's a dare. A challenge. 
 

You are asking Bob to prove you wrong, instead of just listening to his perspective and legitimately considering it. 

Which is exactly what Bob was talking about. 

And is the main reason threads like this are useless.

 

bobzilla
bobzilla MegaDork
1/27/21 8:08 a.m.

this will only lead to locks and patio extensions and I've long known that my viewpoint doesn't matter here on this. So for that reason, I'm once again out. Have fun with the echo chambers we are creating. 

mtn (Forum Supporter)
mtn (Forum Supporter) MegaDork
1/27/21 8:09 a.m.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :

That's not a conversation. It's a dare. A challenge. 
 

You are asking Bob to prove you wrong, instead of just listening to his perspective and legitimately considering it. 

But that is the thing. I have listened. I've considered it. He hasn't given me anything to believe his position is anything other than one of being contrarian and not liking being told what to do. I'm pretty sure that if Indiana required residents to use indoor plumbing, he would build an outhouse out of spite and use it, despite having and preferring indoor plumbing. (I'm assuming he prefers indoor plumbing. He may not. No judgement, I prefer to pee outside myself).

This topic is locked. No further posts are being accepted.

Birthdays
Our Preferred Partners
YWME8UKDgZ6evxux3IFAoI2RSfikC91y5qgebyG2xqAJaIBz5dsekIuTOxuRkswS