Hacker News Reader

Comment by skuhn | Hacker News Reader

They should keep factories closed, unless they are engaged in solving one of the four problems that need to be solved in order for things to safely re-open:

1. Producing masks, gloves, face shields

2. Producing tests or test supplies (cotton swabs, reagents, etc.)

3. Things related to contact tracing (not sure what material goods this would need off-hand)

4. Vaccine research (again, nothing they could do)

The choice is not between re-open now or never re-open. If we actually had at least the first 3 things above, re-opening could be done in a controlled and safe manner. We still don't have those things, months later.

View on HN

Alameda County says it has those things.

There are more places than Alameda County that need those things.

Certainly true! I hope those places get what they need soon. But if Alameda County can safely start reopening before them, I don't see any value in waiting.

Citation needed. Where is the testing capacity needed to meet Bay Area criteria to reopen? It wasn't there as of 2 days ago: https://abc7news.com/health/how-close-is-the-bay-area-to-reo... Nor were PPE requirements met.

All Bay Area counties other than Santa Clara have interpreted the Bay Area criteria as criteria to fully reopen, so they're admittedly not at the 200 per 100,000 number. But I don't see any reason to second-guess their decision that a partial reopening is safe with fewer tests.

Unfortunately, Alameda County doesn't publish daily test counts or anything, so the best citation I have for you is a random news article[1] asserting they're 1/3 of the way to 3100 tests per day.

[1] https://www.kqed.org/science/1963889/coronavirus-some-bay-ar...

And, reopening with 1/3 of the testing capacity necessary to do so seems wise to you? I hope you don't have any elderly relatives in the area, or any health conditions that would predispose you to a severe case.

I don't agree with the premise. Remember that the full reopening will include extremely high-contact locations like schools, restaurants, bars, and movie theaters. It seems plausible that a limited reopening of only retail and manufacturing is safe with a third of the full amount.

You're forgetting the most important one: Liberal opportunities for people to stay at home if they show symptoms. PPE is fine but that's a backup in case someone sick starts coughing at people.

You know in the US far too many people are obsessed with going to work even if sick, because they don't get paid otherwise. This needs to change.

This view is so insane, that I can hardly wrap my head around how anybody can still believe it.

That's insane, here in Europe conditions so much worse compared to California but manufacturing was restarted and not stopped at some places. It's easy to say shut everything down when you have a comfortable wfh tech job and zoom meetings in underwear. Peasants need to make money and feed kids too.

> It's easy to say shut everything down when you have a comfortable wfh tech job and zoom meetings in underwear. Peasants need to make money and feed kids too.

I think you’ve nailed it. The virtuous and vocal “stay home save lives” crowd invariably has almost no skin in the game. They get their food delivered to them (sucks for those folks) and their livelihood is secured.

The rest of us are left to fend for ourselves.

There is data to the contrary.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/class-war-...

So we’re to believe it’s actually reversy, and those suffering financial damage from the shutdown actually love it, and the unfortunate WFH cohort are begging to shove their PJs back into the closet and drudge back to the office?

My wife and I have a two year old business (https://hostelofmaine.com) that will likely go under if stay at home orders & shut downs are not lifted in the near future. That said, I am 100% in favor of continuing to disallow discretionary travel at this time. I would rather go bankrupt and start over (no rich family if you're wondering) than be responsible for an outbreak in our community.

Of course we need to open, but right now (May) is not that time. If I had to guess (which is irrelevant to a data driven approach) I would assume late June or July would be safer.

Large majorities of both cohorts love the shutdown, because they're scared and want to hide inside until it's safe. We have to argue against the shutdowns on those grounds, not invent a class war that isn't happening.

For the time being, many of those worst off are receiving a raise by being unemployed, and still have confidence that their jobs will be there when things begin to recover. And why would you assume it's people trying to go back to the office, have you not watched any of the people protesting the lockdown? They want OTHER people back at work so they can consume things.

It’s the ultimate slacktivism. Many people are used to staying home and doing nothing all day, but now the situation has changed and suddenly their lifestyle is a virtue, they can feel like heroes while people who want to work can be called irresponsible. It’s the same people who think they can help poor people by clicking ‘Like’ on a Facebook post.

Things are going to turn around again of course. Sooner or later reality is going to hit when the handouts stop and the food supply dries up. Humanity isn’t going to survive by doing nothing and the people who put in the work and take the risks now have to be incentivized or they may quit working as well.

No, it isn't easy for me to say this is what needs to be done.

I don't have a job at the moment, I'm trapped in another state, and I started a non profit to distribute hand sanitizer for free in that community -- BECAUSE IT IS STILL NOT AVAILABLE TO EASILY PURCHASE. The Purell factory is literally 10 miles away, and yet we are not where we need to be.

I realize that it totally sucks that we need to do these things in order to safely resume normal society. Wouldn't it be great if we had spent the last 2 months making steady progress on those goals?

http://handsanz.org/

This should really be judged on a regional level, trying to apply blanket protections to the entire country (besides borders which are a national affair) or even an entire state seems like a bad idea to me.

That way it could also move quicker if things actually do turn worse. Since there are plenty of examples already of states and regions opening up without any consequences.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com