In reply to 06HHR (Forum Supporter) :
I think a lot of the problem is that we can't agree on a basic set of facts. What people believe to be true depends on where their opinions lie, not emprical facts that can be verified. I don't think anybody on this thread is cheerleading for China, but they do get the stuff done that they want to do. While, for example, we don't seem to be able to agree that we need to invest in infrastructure until things start collasping, and even then we can't agree on what needs to be done to move forward and fix the problems. We have become paralyzed by our division. I don't think social media created this problem, but it most definitely has amplified it. I don't have any answers, just my .02
Division in itself isn't a bad thing, our government is largely based on it. It's designed to keep power out of the hands of the few. If there is division, things grind to a halt rather than one group streamrolling through their agenda. Which sounds good when you are on the steamroller, not so much if you are in front of it. Also not great if the keys to the steamroller change hands every few years. To get things done, there needs to be a consensus. So the proposals need to be reasonable. For the system to work best, the people need to hold both sides accountable. Over reach and refuse to a reasonable offer? You should hear it from your side for blowing the opportunity. Obstruct a reasonable measure just for the sake of obstruction? Your side should hold your feet to the fire. But that doesn't happen as much any more. Either blind devotion to your side or so much hate towards the other, which gives your side the green light to be even more stubborn. Still, this is how it's supposed to work. It's inconvient in the short term but best for the long term. Unfortunately people don't pay enough attention to the long term. Over time it balances out. We are about as divided as I've seen in my lifetime, but I feel the pendulum is swinging back the other way.
On the other end of the spectrum, you have China. China doesn't need to worry about division. Or elections. Or the will of the people. When you boil it down, China just takes what it wants. Pretty easy to get things done that way. Want a high speed train? Easy. We'll just take your land (it was never your land) and make you build it. Oh, you think you are going to ride it? It's not meant for you, peasant. It's for the important people, of which you will never become. Now get back to work or we'll send you to a re-education camp.
Now, this is not all rosey for China. The most productive people are expecting more of the pie, which doesn't jive with communism. Which is why conversations like this one are so dangerous in China.
z31maniac said:
93EXCivic said:
In reply to RX Reven' :
There are a number of reasons I'd prefer high speed rail over flying.
High speed rail is only possible because of tax dollars, IE, everyone's tax dollars supporting it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think only two high speed rail lines in the world pay for themselves.
....crap I'll stop myself there. I don't want this to turn into something else (and yes I realize airlines here are heavily subisidized which I also don't agree with).
Italian's HSR was more cost-effective in some cases, as Not Just Bikes details:
In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
I'm not saying that China was reporting accurately or inaccurately. I wouldn't put it past their government to downplay the impact, but the other allied countries who are typically very accurate in not only counting and reporting, they are countries that specifically work in conjunction with WHO, NATO, and other allying organizations. I do have much greater faith in those numbers.
One of the troubles with the potentially skewed numbers from India is the large rural population. Per an NPR segment I heard, one of the biggest problems there is access to both healthcare and communication. If you're a corn farmer north of Udaipur and the nearest phone is 30 miles away, you just die when you get ill. No confirmed case, no reporting, you're just dead. Very difficult to accurately report disease numbers when there is no way to track it.
How accurate are our own numbers? Individual states had different reporting criteria, and many modified that over time. We were inconsistent state to state, let alone comparing us to another country. If the US reported like Colorado and France reported like Florida, we would be vastly off compared to reporting off of the same criteria. Some countries inflated their numbers while others deflated them, both intentionally and unintentionally. Again, not picking on that one topic, just making a broader point on statistics in general.
mtn
MegaDork
2/15/22 8:11 p.m.
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
US is fairly accurate overall, especially for hospitalizations, though we are likely under reporting cases to a severe degree and to a lesser but still significant level, deaths.
Duke said:
In reply to RX Reven' :
Questioning science scientifically is not being a denier.
Just throwing a bunch of irrelevant but leading questions, junk science, and other crap at it hoping some sticks (in the public mind, anyway) IS being a denier.
This is the best thing I've read on here in a while. You took exactly what I was thinking and put it into a coherent sentence, which I'm not great at.
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
US is fairly accurate overall, especially for hospitalizations, though we are likely under reporting cases to a severe degree and to a lesser but still significant level, deaths.
It may be more accurate/ consistent now, but that still skews overall numbers. This wasn't just outside opinions, some areas even revised their numbers. Others admitted to inaccuracies, but did not change reporting methods for consistency sake. There is more to it, but I'm not trying to argue the right or wrong ways to count this particular statistic. I'm just highlighting that there is a significant margin for error. I've never seen a + or - estimate, but I'm guessing it would be eye opening. My limited research tells me that you are probably right, the under reporting may balance it out. But that is another variable, which likely applies to both sides of the equation and doesn't change the result. For arguments sake, say US deaths are over reported compared to France due to differences in reporting criteria. But there are also deaths that aren't accounted for, which would bring the US more back in line. Except France is also likely to have unaccounted for deaths. Or maybe not. The point is, this a very hard comparison to make, yet looks simple on a graph.
Tuning your car on a dyno is a good analogy. It's a useful tool if you do your best to limit the variables between changes. But if you go to a different dyno on a different day, you might get vastly different numbers with the same car.
Numbers really don't seem to matter. We went apeE36 M3 and completely changed how much of the country functioned over 3000 deaths. Now we have that every day and a half without blinking an eye and just excuse it as those people needed to be thinned from the herd anyway, comorbidities and such.
Because I asked about natural immunity after my first go around in MArch 2020, I was called anti-vax. Because I asked why we, the US, were so focused on a vaccine that doesn't stop transmission or cases, merely severity and ignoring natural immunity I was a science denier. Now that there are dozens of NI studies from all over the world, and we are still pushing he "vax or you're a denier" program I just have to wonder why we're pushing so hard?
I could understand if I was pushing a "5g signal" or "it makes you sterile" or the popular "its eugenics!" crazy theories. But what I wanted to know was why we were, and to a degree still are, ignoring that 2 million+ people in the US alone have gained a better immunity naturally without the need for continual boosters? Why are these people not considered the same as any vaccinated person?Why are these people threatened with losing their livelyhood because they do not want to take the risk of a vaccine for a virus they've already caught and beaten? And why are we silencing anyone asking these questions?
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
To quote Terry Pratchett:
"...Pulling together is the aim of despotism and tyranny. Free men pull in all kinds of directions." He smiled. "It's the only way to make progress..."
From 'The Truth', spoken by Lord Vertinari.
I think what has made America and modern Western culture great is liberal pluralism (small 'L'). People often forget that. Effectively no one is all right or all wrong. We get so caught up in wanting to be right, that we forget we're wrong, too. We view disagreement as negative, when the reality is that the chaos of disagreement and being out of step with each other and moving forward anyway is where real progress gets made. We forget that being different is GOOD.
In reply to bobzilla :
It is rather curious to see how so much of what was "lies and conspiracies and misinformation" 18 months ago is now being repeated by folks with authority and political clout, leading doctors and directors and such.That's as far as I'll go here.
Im angry because the sun keeps setting before I'm off work.
wae
PowerDork
2/16/22 9:38 a.m.
Beer Baron said:
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
To quote Terry Pratchett:
"...Pulling together is the aim of despotism and tyranny. Free men pull in all kinds of directions." He smiled. "It's the only way to make progress..."
From 'The Truth', spoken by Lord Vertinari.
I think what has made America and modern Western culture great is liberal pluralism (small 'L'). People often forget that. Effectively no one is all right or all wrong. We get so caught up in wanting to be right, that we forget we're wrong, too. We view disagreement as negative, when the reality is that the chaos of disagreement and being out of step with each other and moving forward anyway is where real progress gets made. We forget that being different is GOOD.
I think you're quite right! And the other thing that we forget is that for the most part, Americans are way more similar than different. We focus on those differences a lot, but a lot of it comes down to arguing if that shade of green is more "seaweed" or "pine".
Some very good points I think. I will reinforce the concept that differences are good, and discussing (not arguing) those differences is critical!
One thing that does bother me is when I see or hear someone describe whatever side they don't like as generally "bad" in some way. Not only is that almost certainly not true (most all are shades of gray), but it ignores the real fact that the two "sides" are needed and are actually helpful to each other. This of course adds to any anger.
I thought for a silly concept: I suspect most are somewhat familiar with the popular reality concept of locking people in a location, with no outside contact, making them do things, then watching the "rats" in the cage fight? Well, my idea is to take a bunch of people from different "sides" on things, lock them in a house, and effectively force them to talk. Cage fight you say? Well, being locked up, I would suspect, eventually they would realize they have a lot in common (maybe these can be the tasks they have to do). As an addition there would be an ability to ask "questions" to an outside group of researchers, who would provide answers (data) in the most objective way possible (noting how much uncertainty there is).
Would anyone watch (people love conflict? What would be the result? Tune in, Wednesday night at 8 when we find out.... ( 
)
In reply to aircooled :
Humans are naturally tribal and desire place and status within their tribe.
Put people in a place and pit them against each other, they'll form tribes and fight against each other.
Take those same group, and put them together to solve a pressing problem, they'll band together.
I'd say that's one of the big reasons why this group is much less disfunctional when things butt up against politics or social issues that frequently divide people. This is a group of people that actually care about solving problems around a narrow range of shared interests. You're not going to gain status by "owning" someone from the opposite side. You'll gain status by building a cool car, or be knowledgeable about driving fast, or being able to give advice on how to repair things.
Even when we all argue politics and stuff, we deep down know that these aren't issues we really need to worry about solving.
The more arbitrary status is and the less power you have to actually accomplish anything, the nastier people get to fight for status. This is why high school cliques and prisons are so mean.
Maybe this is also why we're so testy lately. In the bleak of winter is when we're least able to focus our energy on actually progressing on things that matter to us.
In reply to Beer Baron :
That sounds pretty spot on to me. I've been pretty restless and wanting to actually accomplish something and between this and that I haven't been able to turn a wrench or learn new songs or build anything. You know, all the things I like to do and get a sense of accomplishment from. I was actually talking to Mrs. about it just last night.
Just another reason I don't like winter or aging.
Beer Baron said:
Maybe this is also why we're so testy lately. In the bleak of winter is when we're least able to focus our energy on actually progressing on things that matter to us.
Definitely. I think part of it for me as well, is trying to learn to live with this "new normal."
We don't know many people here in OKC and now we both work from home permanently, we don't really get a chance to see or hang out with other people in real life often.
j_tso
HalfDork
2/16/22 2:14 p.m.
Beer Baron said:
Humans are naturally tribal and desire place and status within their tribe.
Put people in a place and pit them against each other, they'll form tribes and fight against each other.
Supposedly that's why there's like 50 accents in England, a relatively tiny area. People gotta find a way to divide themselves.
I really want to get another fun car so I can go to the track and try AutoX.......but the only stuff that interests me is in the $45-60k range. I sold the Miata last year because I put 900 miles on it in a year.
So it just seems silly to have that kind of money tied up in something that gets taken to brunch 1-2 times per month, maybe a Cars and Coffee and a few AutoX or HPDE. I also want to be able to use the same car for road trips.........which is why I keep thinking about the Supra or new Z. A new Camaro or Mustang would work too. I'd love a C7, but who knows when the price of clean used ones are going to come back from outer space.
In reply to Wally (Forum Supporter) :
Numbers really don't seem to matter. We went apeE36 M3 and completely changed how much of the country functioned over 3000 deaths. Now we have that every day and a half without blinking an eye and just excuse it as those people needed to be thinned from the herd anyway, comorbidities and such.
I was trying to highlight the statistical aspect, not the subject. Numbers most certainly do matter. By the numbers above, you are 100% correct. But numbers don't tell the whole story. Fear is an efficient motivator. A terror attack is very scary to most people. Not just because of the numbers, but because of the lack of control. Pandemics are scary, and early on, most people were willing to do whatever it took to stay safe. As they learned more about Covid, people learned of ways to control their own safety and their fear subsided. The threat isn't the difference, the control or even the illusion of control is the difference. That is why many people are afraid to fly but give no thought to driving, when statistically driving is much more dangerous.
A more accurate example of why numbers matter would be to compare the response to Covid to that of the flu. People are accustomed to the flu and feel they have some control in avoiding or treating it, even though it has killed large numbers of people for years. We have taken much more serious steps to fight Covid than the flu specifically due to the numbers, so apparently the numbers do matter.
I'm not arguing for or against the responses to any of the above, just pointing out the reality of why they are treated differently.
aircooled said:
Some very good points I think. I will reinforce the concept that differences are good, and discussing (not arguing) those differences is critical!
One thing that does bother me is when I see or hear someone describe whatever side they don't like as generally "bad" in some way. Not only is that almost certainly not true (most all are shades of gray), but it ignores the real fact that the two "sides" are needed and are actually helpful to each other. This of course adds to any anger.
I thought for a silly concept: I suspect most are somewhat familiar with the popular reality concept of locking people in a location, with no outside contact, making them do things, then watching the "rats" in the cage fight? Well, my idea is to take a bunch of people from different "sides" on things, lock them in a house, and effectively force them to talk. Cage fight you say? Well, being locked up, I would suspect, eventually they would realize they have a lot in common (maybe these can be the tasks they have to do). As an addition there would be an ability to ask "questions" to an outside group of researchers, who would provide answers (data) in the most objective way possible (noting how much uncertainty there is).
Would anyone watch (people love conflict? What would be the result? Tune in, Wednesday night at 8 when we find out.... ( )
That idea was sort of attempted back in 1973 when Mexican anthropologist Santiago Genovés put together a group of attractive, but otherwise diverse people on a raft and filmed them sailing across the Atlantic. For the most part, the only conflict was of his own making as he discovered watching a bunch of people figure out their dynamic and then get along to accomplish what was basically a life-or-death task made for a boring film.
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
The part I find amusing about numbers and feelings at least among my relatives and friends is that there are a lot of people who were fine with all the post 9/11 measures, are still very worried about terrorism in some form and believe they are somehow keeping me safe from it while at the same time feel that Covid is harmless and there is no need for any precautions. It's an interesting disconnect from reality.
Today, I was a bit angry, and reasonably rude to the Matco tool guy who came into the shop, talking about how he'd just heard that the covid shot gives people HIV.
I believe the first word from me was "BullE36 M3"
I think I was justified, and if someone came in telling me that Justin Trudeau had a basement full of stolen Gypsy children whose blood he consumes, I'd say the same thing. Good Lord, people. does noone do the sniff test anymore?
In reply to Streetwiseguy :
It's hard to take people seriously when they drag out things that are demonstrably false. I was told that if someone got the vaccine while they already had antibodies their blood would turn to gel and they'd have a stroke. It's been over a year and I still haven't had one.
We'll, I know my wife is angry because she's trying to sell some stuff on Facebook Marketplace.
