In truth, the basic point of the story is that there is no right or wrong answer here.
No matter which way it goes, there is some good and some bad being done.
It is a case of sacrificing privacy versus community health and well being -- even their lives. To put it simply: -- would you sacrifice a stranger's life for your personal privacy?
-- would you sacrifice your mother's life for your personal privacy?
-- would you sacrifice your own life for your personal privacy?
Basically, What is your price? What price are you willing to pay?
Unfortunately, ideology and politics tend to replace valid debate with political rhetoric and disinformation.
The way Americans throw the word ‘freedom’ around like it’s an absolute really baffles me. It isn’t. You aren’t free to kill someone else if you want. Heck, you aren’t even free to drive as fast as you want on a highway. Being part of a society requires some form of individual sacrifice. Where that balance lies is up for debate. One would argue that your freedom to go to Home Depot is superseded by a Nurse’s right to go home to her family and the end of the day.
The way Americans throw the word ‘freedom’ around like it’s an absolute really baffles me. It isn’t. You aren’t free to kill someone else if you want. Heck, you aren’t even free to drive as fast as you want on a highway. Being part of a society requires some form of individual sacrifice. Where that balance lies is up for debate. One would argue that your freedom to go to Home Depot is superseded by a Nurse’s right to go home to her family and the end of the day.
You are free to kill somebody, if it's for legitimate self defense purposes and there is a life threatening situation.
But yes, of course there are various laws and rules, such as a person can not drive as fast as they want on the roads or highway.
And yes, it is where that balance lies that is up for debate, and there have been numerous instances of politicians taking advantage of the current situation and going far beyond what can be considered reasonable measures and they are naturally getting push back.
I don’t understand where France has a problem. I have written two apps that are running continuously in the background using location as the background mode. Battery is fine and my app gets running all the time (connected to a server with URLSessionWebSocket).
Apple and Google rely on bluetooth for contract tracking rather than location thru GPS. France plans to do the same thing. Now read the article again as it pertains to limitations on bluetooth.
Why should I read again? You must have misread my answer: France’s problem is to keep the app running in the background with Bluetooth on. I do exactly that! I use it to send messages to some persons that are in the basement without WiFi or 4G coverage: using Bluetooth to jump messages from devices to devices. It just works.
Ah, well OK then, the AppleInsider article is incorrect. It says "On iOS, apps that transfer data over Bluetooth are prevented from running in the background. The limitation, designed to protect user data, severely impacts the operating capabilities of contact tracing apps, which typically need to run continuously in order to be effective."
Thanks for the clarification.
AppleInsider's article is correct.
If the app in question is doing this, it is in contravention of Apple's policies and developer guidelines if it is the default condition. You'd specifically have to opt-in to it, tolerate the Apple dialog boxes saying its running in the background, and so forth.
What France is looking for is mandatory opt-in of location and data usage, regardless of user setting -- and no way to turn it off.
There are no such restrictions on a lot of Android phones.
I was reading about one country that had released their own virus tracking app for both iOS and Android and on Android, the phones were dying out almost immediately because of the constant tracking and bluetooth etc.
On iOS, there were no such problems, because Apple forbids such tracking outside of the app.
I don’t understand where France has a problem. I have written two apps that are running continuously in the background using location as the background mode. Battery is fine and my app gets running all the time (connected to a server with URLSessionWebSocket).
Apple and Google rely on bluetooth for contract tracking rather than location thru GPS. France plans to do the same thing. Now read the article again as it pertains to limitations on bluetooth.
Why should I read again? You must have misread my answer: France’s problem is to keep the app running in the background with Bluetooth on. I do exactly that! I use it to send messages to some persons that are in the basement without WiFi or 4G coverage: using Bluetooth to jump messages from devices to devices. It just works.
Ah, well OK then, the AppleInsider article is incorrect. It says "On iOS, apps that transfer data over Bluetooth are prevented from running in the background. The limitation, designed to protect user data, severely impacts the operating capabilities of contact tracing apps, which typically need to run continuously in order to be effective."
Thanks for the clarification.
AppleInsider's article is correct.
If the app in question is doing this, it is in contravention of Apple's policies and developer guidelines if it is the default condition. You'd specifically have to opt-in to it, tolerate the Apple dialog boxes saying its running in the background, and so forth.
What France is looking for is mandatory opt-in of location and data usage, regardless of user setting -- and no way to turn it off.
Thanks Mike. I l already knew that and figured the OP would chime in again. Apparently not. That's the beauty of the Apple/Google contact tracking plan.
The way Americans throw the word ‘freedom’ around like it’s an absolute really baffles me. It isn’t. You aren’t free to kill someone else if you want. Heck, you aren’t even free to drive as fast as you want on a highway. Being part of a society requires some form of individual sacrifice. Where that balance lies is up for debate. One would argue that your freedom to go to Home Depot is superseded by a Nurse’s right to go home to her family and the end of the day.
You’d benefit from actually READING the US Constitution instead of blabbering on about a subject which you have little knowledge.
This is so true. The general public is naive, thinking the rights they’re giving away right now will never be taken away again except for something super serious. On the contrary, because of this virus we are now at serious risk of more and more government leaders using this or that excuse to restrict citizens in the name of public safety.
The governor of MI is already showing this in going way beyond sensible safety in her restrictions. And like a petty child she even threatened further restrictions in response to some people protesting.
Our founders fought to the death for freedom, but now we’re itching to give up whatever we can out of fear over a virus which will hurt far less people than a crumbling economy and the loss of valuing freedom.
Why the fuck don't you explain to us in detail how the restrictions in Michigan, specifically, differ from that of dozens of other states doing the exact same thing? What are all these "way beyond reasonable" restrictions? Or are you just mindlessly parroting Trump's tweets, who in turn was just mindlessly parroting some bullshit that an asshole said on Fox News? What is so special about Michigan, besides the fact that you happen to dislike the governor because some republicans told you to? The people protesting are a tiny number of nutjobs who have little grasp on the facts, and Trump decided to exploit that for some cheap political points. What blows my mind are these conspiracy theories, in which the governors are somehow benefitting from these shutdowns, when the reality is the exact opposite.
We have 700,000 infections and almost 40,000 deaths in a little over a month, caused by a virus that we still dont understand, and there's still people like you pretending the flu is more dangerous and thumping chest about FREEDOM, when officials are doing the sane thing in terms of public health measures.
These people are being incited into action by rightwing Astroturf groups, with a pretty clear connection to their opposition to the Michigan governorship:
“A trio of far-right, pro-gun provocateurs is behind some of the largest Facebook groups calling for anti-quarantine protests around the country, offering the latest illustration that some seemingly organic demonstrations are being engineered by a network of conservative activists.”
[...]
“Also promoting the demonstrations — including spending several hundred dollars to advertise the event on Facebook — was the Michigan Freedom Fund, which is headed by Greg McNeilly, a longtime adviser to the DeVos family. He served as campaign manager for Dick DeVos, the husband of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, when he ran unsuccessfully for governor of Michigan in 2006.”
The way Americans throw the word ‘freedom’ around like it’s an absolute really baffles me. It isn’t. You aren’t free to kill someone else if you want. Heck, you aren’t even free to drive as fast as you want on a highway. Being part of a society requires some form of individual sacrifice. Where that balance lies is up for debate. One would argue that your freedom to go to Home Depot is superseded by a Nurse’s right to go home to her family and the end of the day.
You’d benefit from actually READING the US Constitution instead of blabbering on about a subject which you have little knowledge.
You might benefit from your own advice. He was correct.
It is unfortunate that that word has been weaponized as a political tool by one party. Even as teenagers we learned that freedom comes with responsibilities, obligations, rules and boundaries. Well, most teenagers.
The way Americans throw the word ‘freedom’ around like it’s an absolute really baffles me. It isn’t. You aren’t free to kill someone else if you want. Heck, you aren’t even free to drive as fast as you want on a highway. Being part of a society requires some form of individual sacrifice. Where that balance lies is up for debate. One would argue that your freedom to go to Home Depot is superseded by a Nurse’s right to go home to her family and the end of the day.
You’d benefit from actually READING the US Constitution instead of blabbering on about a subject which you have little knowledge.
You’re right, I have not read your constitution. Nor did I need to for the purposes of my comment. I realize your constitution allows you to bear arms to defend yourself, and under the right circumstances, yes kill someone. That’s not what I was talking about. My post was about my perception of Americans frequent use of the term ‘freedom’, specifically as an outsider. And my understanding that ‘freedom’ is not an absolute.
Give me a fucking break. The mitigation measures in place are there to hopefully prevent hundreds of thousands (if not more) deaths. Nobody is losing their rights, they're trying to prevent a terrible situation from getting much worse. Your perceived "freedom" is not more important than others' right to live.
Why don't you give us all a break. Then MI governor has hone way overboard what is necessary to keep people safe. She is not protecting hundreds of thousands from dying. This is easy to prove as most places do not have anywhere near the restrictions that she has put in place and the infection and mortality rate there is not that much different than other places with a lot less restrictions. She is showing her true self as self appointed dictator. All in the name of "Safety".
In fact all around the world they are finding out, based on antibody testing, that up to 20-80 times more people were infected than we knew about. So the actual mortality rate is a lot lower than we thought. These are all people who got infected and didn't even know it. (recent testing in Los Angeles and Santa Clara county In Cali plus testing in Germany and China and elsewhere with similar results. And a new one I read about today from Boston). This is still initial data but it is looking "positive" as they learn more about the virus.
Give me a fucking break. The mitigation measures in place are there to hopefully prevent hundreds of thousands (if not more) deaths. Nobody is losing their rights, they're trying to prevent a terrible situation from getting much worse. Your perceived "freedom" is not more important than others' right to live.
Why don't you give us all a break. Then MI governor has hone way overboard what is necessary to keep people safe. She is not protecting hundreds of thousands from dying. This is easy to prove as most places do not have anywhere near the restrictions that she has put in place and the infection and mortality rate there is not that much different than other places with a lot less restrictions. She is showing her true self as self appointed dictator. All in the name of "Safety".
In fact all around the world they are finding out, based on antibody testing, that up to 20-80 times more people were infected than we knew about. So the actual mortality rate is a lot lower than we thought. These are all people who got infected and didn't even know it. (recent testing in Los Angeles and Santa Clara county In Cali plus testing in Germany and China and elsewhere with similar results. And a new one I read about today from Boston). This is still initial data but it is looking "positive" as they learn more about the virus.
No, he's was correct.
It is unfortunate that the governors have been put in such a situation by the lack of action by our federal government. But they are doing the best they can to save lives in a bad situation
Give me a fucking break. The mitigation measures in place are there to hopefully prevent hundreds of thousands (if not more) deaths. Nobody is losing their rights, they're trying to prevent a terrible situation from getting much worse. Your perceived "freedom" is not more important than others' right to live.
Why don't you give us all a break. Then MI governor has hone way overboard what is necessary to keep people safe. She is not protecting hundreds of thousands from dying. This is easy to prove as most places do not have anywhere near the restrictions that she has put in place and the infection and mortality rate there is not that much different than other places with a lot less restrictions. She is showing her true self as self appointed dictator. All in the name of "Safety".
In fact all around the world they are finding out, based on antibody testing, that up to 20-80 times more people were infected than we knew about. So the actual mortality rate is a lot lower than we thought. These are all people who got infected and didn't even know it. (recent testing in Los Angeles and Santa Clara county In Cali plus testing in Germany and China and elsewhere with similar results. And a new one I read about today from Boston). This is still initial data but it is looking "positive" as they learn more about the virus.
Not sure why you put "safety" in quotes, that's what these measures are literally for. There is no dictator in this scenario, Governors are elected leaders charged with protecting their residents. I live in WA which was the first major hotspot, and Michigan has long since passed us in number of deaths. You should be glad you have a leader willing to try and protect as many people as possible.
And yes, numbers of asymptomatic cases are increasing with testing. That's been predicted since the beginning. That does not mean that thousands of people aren't still dying every day from this thing and that we shouldn't be doing our damndest to protect those who haven't been infected yet, which is a very large number of people regardless.
Not sure why you put "safety" in quotes, that's what these measures are literally for. There is no dictator in this scenario, Governors are elected leaders charged with protecting their residents. I live in WA which was the first major hotspot, and Michigan has long since passed us in number of deaths. You should be glad you have a leader willing to try and protect as many people as possible.
And yes, numbers of asymptomatic cases are increasing with testing. That's been predicted since the beginning. That does not mean that thousands of people aren't still dying every day from this thing and that we shouldn't be doing our damndest to protect those who haven't been infected yet, which is a very large number of people regardless.
I put "safety" in quotes, because much of what the MI governor has done is NOT in the name of safety. There is a dictator in this scenario. I think you have a reading comprehension problem. I laid it out clearly. She is not trying to protect people (in everything she does -- yes some of the measures are reasonable and provide actual protection) -- she is trying out her inner dictator inclinations.
While some of the basic things are done in the name of safety, and are part of expert recommendations and are common to most all the US states (and many parts of the world), she has taken it much further by prohibiting, mandating and doing such things that have no bearing on the health and safety of the residents of MI. This is born out that the virus rate in MI is not substantially different than all the states that are NOT doing all these expanded, extra prohibitions and stuff people are protesting.
No one is saying we shouldn't have safety efforts to keep this from spreading and protect people etc. Not everything the MI governor has done increases the safety and health of people.
The reason the asymptomatic case increase is important is because it helps us forecast the overall impact of this. We don't shut down the world for the flu, and right now, it is appearing like the flu has a higher mortality rate than does this Covid-19. We'll have to get more and better data as time goes by to determine the actual mortality rate and the actual affect. For now, most states and countries have taken measures to reduce the spread, to "flatten the curve" to protect health systems, etc. Some places have gone overboard in mandating stuff that is of little real value in this fight. That is what we are talking about.
Not sure why you put "safety" in quotes, that's what these measures are literally for. There is no dictator in this scenario, Governors are elected leaders charged with protecting their residents. I live in WA which was the first major hotspot, and Michigan has long since passed us in number of deaths. You should be glad you have a leader willing to try and protect as many people as possible.
And yes, numbers of asymptomatic cases are increasing with testing. That's been predicted since the beginning. That does not mean that thousands of people aren't still dying every day from this thing and that we shouldn't be doing our damndest to protect those who haven't been infected yet, which is a very large number of people regardless.
I put "safety" in quotes, because much of what the MI governor has done is NOT in the name of safety. There is a dictator in this scenario. I think you have a reading comprehension problem. I laid it out clearly. She is not trying to protect people (in everything she does -- yes some of the measures are reasonable and provide actual protection) -- she is trying out her inner dictator inclinations.
While some of the basic things are done in the name of safety, and are part of expert recommendations and are common to most all the US states (and many parts of the world), she has taken it much further by prohibiting, mandating and doing such things that have no bearing on the health and safety of the residents of MI. This is born out that the virus rate in MI is not substantially different than all the states that are NOT doing all these expanded, extra prohibitions and stuff people are protesting.
No one is saying we shouldn't have safety efforts to keep this from spreading and protect people etc. Not everything the MI governor has done increases the safety and health of people.
The reason the asymptomatic case increase is important is because it helps us forecast the overall impact of this. We don't shut down the world for the flu, and right now, it is appearing like the flu has a higher mortality rate than does this Covid-19. We'll have to get more and better data as time goes by to determine the actual mortality rate and the actual affect. For now, most states and countries have taken measures to reduce the spread, to "flatten the curve" to protect health systems, etc. Some places have gone overboard in mandating stuff that is of little real value in this fight. That is what we are talking about.
That's only true in the alternative reality of right wing propaganda -- which takes real facts and twists, distorts and exaggerates them to get the cult riled up. These rioters have been instigated and funded by far right activists. They need slapped in the face with the cold fish of reality.
By the way, Cuomo said it well. To paraphrase: "Your right to do and go wherever you want ends when it can cause my death."
Not sure why you put "safety" in quotes, that's what these measures are literally for. There is no dictator in this scenario, Governors are elected leaders charged with protecting their residents. I live in WA which was the first major hotspot, and Michigan has long since passed us in number of deaths. You should be glad you have a leader willing to try and protect as many people as possible.
And yes, numbers of asymptomatic cases are increasing with testing. That's been predicted since the beginning. That does not mean that thousands of people aren't still dying every day from this thing and that we shouldn't be doing our damndest to protect those who haven't been infected yet, which is a very large number of people regardless.
I put "safety" in quotes, because much of what the MI governor has done is NOT in the name of safety. There is a dictator in this scenario. I think you have a reading comprehension problem. I laid it out clearly. She is not trying to protect people (in everything she does -- yes some of the measures are reasonable and provide actual protection) -- she is trying out her inner dictator inclinations.
While some of the basic things are done in the name of safety, and are part of expert recommendations and are common to most all the US states (and many parts of the world), she has taken it much further by prohibiting, mandating and doing such things that have no bearing on the health and safety of the residents of MI. This is born out that the virus rate in MI is not substantially different than all the states that are NOT doing all these expanded, extra prohibitions and stuff people are protesting.
Can you give an example of an unreasonable restriction that MI has imposed? I haven't heard anything specific.
Not sure why you put "safety" in quotes, that's what these measures are literally for. There is no dictator in this scenario, Governors are elected leaders charged with protecting their residents. I live in WA which was the first major hotspot, and Michigan has long since passed us in number of deaths. You should be glad you have a leader willing to try and protect as many people as possible.
And yes, numbers of asymptomatic cases are increasing with testing. That's been predicted since the beginning. That does not mean that thousands of people aren't still dying every day from this thing and that we shouldn't be doing our damndest to protect those who haven't been infected yet, which is a very large number of people regardless.
I put "safety" in quotes, because much of what the MI governor has done is NOT in the name of safety. There is a dictator in this scenario. I think you have a reading comprehension problem. I laid it out clearly. She is not trying to protect people (in everything she does -- yes some of the measures are reasonable and provide actual protection) -- she is trying out her inner dictator inclinations.
While some of the basic things are done in the name of safety, and are part of expert recommendations and are common to most all the US states (and many parts of the world), she has taken it much further by prohibiting, mandating and doing such things that have no bearing on the health and safety of the residents of MI. This is born out that the virus rate in MI is not substantially different than all the states that are NOT doing all these expanded, extra prohibitions and stuff people are protesting.
Can you give an example of an unreasonable restriction that MI has imposed? I haven't heard anything specific.
F R E E D O M !
D E M O C R A C Y !
T H E A M E R I C A N W A Y !
M A G A !
L O L !
... Silly things! Real Americans think that they can go stick their slogans and their AR15's....
Or, to paraphrase Cuomo: "you're right to do stupid things ends when it puts my life in danger."
Not sure why you put "safety" in quotes, that's what these measures are literally for. There is no dictator in this scenario, Governors are elected leaders charged with protecting their residents. I live in WA which was the first major hotspot, and Michigan has long since passed us in number of deaths. You should be glad you have a leader willing to try and protect as many people as possible.
And yes, numbers of asymptomatic cases are increasing with testing. That's been predicted since the beginning. That does not mean that thousands of people aren't still dying every day from this thing and that we shouldn't be doing our damndest to protect those who haven't been infected yet, which is a very large number of people regardless.
I put "safety" in quotes, because much of what the MI governor has done is NOT in the name of safety. There is a dictator in this scenario. I think you have a reading comprehension problem. I laid it out clearly. She is not trying to protect people (in everything she does -- yes some of the measures are reasonable and provide actual protection) -- she is trying out her inner dictator inclinations.
While some of the basic things are done in the name of safety, and are part of expert recommendations and are common to most all the US states (and many parts of the world), she has taken it much further by prohibiting, mandating and doing such things that have no bearing on the health and safety of the residents of MI. This is born out that the virus rate in MI is not substantially different than all the states that are NOT doing all these expanded, extra prohibitions and stuff people are protesting.
Can you give an example of an unreasonable restriction that MI has imposed? I haven't heard anything specific.
F R E E D O M !
D E M O C R A C Y !
T H E A M E R I C A N W A Y !
M A G A !
L O L !
... Silly things! Real Americans think that they can go stick their slogans and their AR15's....
Or, to paraphrase Cuomo: "you're right to do stupid things ends when it puts my life in danger."
Not sure why you put "safety" in quotes, that's what these measures are literally for. There is no dictator in this scenario, Governors are elected leaders charged with protecting their residents. I live in WA which was the first major hotspot, and Michigan has long since passed us in number of deaths. You should be glad you have a leader willing to try and protect as many people as possible.
And yes, numbers of asymptomatic cases are increasing with testing. That's been predicted since the beginning. That does not mean that thousands of people aren't still dying every day from this thing and that we shouldn't be doing our damndest to protect those who haven't been infected yet, which is a very large number of people regardless.
I put "safety" in quotes, because much of what the MI governor has done is NOT in the name of safety. There is a dictator in this scenario. I think you have a reading comprehension problem. I laid it out clearly. She is not trying to protect people (in everything she does -- yes some of the measures are reasonable and provide actual protection) -- she is trying out her inner dictator inclinations.
While some of the basic things are done in the name of safety, and are part of expert recommendations and are common to most all the US states (and many parts of the world), she has taken it much further by prohibiting, mandating and doing such things that have no bearing on the health and safety of the residents of MI. This is born out that the virus rate in MI is not substantially different than all the states that are NOT doing all these expanded, extra prohibitions and stuff people are protesting.
Can you give an example of an unreasonable restriction that MI has imposed? I haven't heard anything specific.
F R E E D O M !
D E M O C R A C Y !
T H E A M E R I C A N W A Y !
M A G A !
L O L !
... Silly things! Real Americans think that they can go stick their slogans and their AR15's....
Or, to paraphrase Cuomo: "you're right to do stupid things ends when it puts my life in danger."
Geez George... The article is about France and here you go again frothing at the mouth about Trump who has nothing to do with France. Do you have to detour EVERY thread?
We all know exactly how you feel about anyone "not a Democrat". Give it a rest and maybe stay on topic. Whaddya think, could you?
We don't shut down the world for the flu, and right now, it is appearing like the flu has a higher mortality rate than does this Covid-19.
No, it isn't. We've already hit 50K deaths in a couple months with mitigation measures in place. Even if asymptomatic cases are much higher than previously thought, it's clear this thing hasn't run through huge swaths of the population yet. We'll clear the 60K flu deaths from last season (which was a particularly gnarly one) in short order. Anyone suggesting this thing is on par with the flu at this point is being willfully obtuse or just plain doesn't understand math.
Comments
-- would you sacrifice a stranger's life for your personal privacy?
But yes, of course there are various laws and rules, such as a person can not drive as fast as they want on the roads or highway.
And yes, it is where that balance lies that is up for debate, and there have been numerous instances of politicians taking advantage of the current situation and going far beyond what can be considered reasonable measures and they are naturally getting push back.
If the app in question is doing this, it is in contravention of Apple's policies and developer guidelines if it is the default condition. You'd specifically have to opt-in to it, tolerate the Apple dialog boxes saying its running in the background, and so forth.
What France is looking for is mandatory opt-in of location and data usage, regardless of user setting -- and no way to turn it off.
I was reading about one country that had released their own virus tracking app for both iOS and Android and on Android, the phones were dying out almost immediately because of the constant tracking and bluetooth etc.
On iOS, there were no such problems, because Apple forbids such tracking outside of the app.
That's the beauty of the Apple/Google contact tracking plan.
“A trio of far-right, pro-gun provocateurs is behind some of the largest Facebook groups calling for anti-quarantine protests around the country, offering the latest illustration that some seemingly organic demonstrations are being engineered by a network of conservative activists.”
[...]
“Also promoting the demonstrations — including spending several hundred dollars to advertise the event on Facebook — was the Michigan Freedom Fund, which is headed by Greg McNeilly, a longtime adviser to the DeVos family. He served as campaign manager for Dick DeVos, the husband of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, when he ran unsuccessfully for governor of Michigan in 2006.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/04/19/pro-gun-activists-using-facebook-groups-push-anti-quarantine-protests/
In fact all around the world they are finding out, based on antibody testing, that up to 20-80 times more people were infected than we knew about. So the actual mortality rate is a lot lower than we thought. These are all people who got infected and didn't even know it. (recent testing in Los Angeles and Santa Clara county In Cali plus testing in Germany and China and elsewhere with similar results. And a new one I read about today from Boston). This is still initial data but it is looking "positive" as they learn more about the virus.
No, he's was correct.
It is unfortunate that the governors have been put in such a situation by the lack of action by our federal government. But they are doing the best they can to save lives in a bad situation
And yes, numbers of asymptomatic cases are increasing with testing. That's been predicted since the beginning. That does not mean that thousands of people aren't still dying every day from this thing and that we shouldn't be doing our damndest to protect those who haven't been infected yet, which is a very large number of people regardless.
While some of the basic things are done in the name of safety, and are part of expert recommendations and are common to most all the US states (and many parts of the world), she has taken it much further by prohibiting, mandating and doing such things that have no bearing on the health and safety of the residents of MI. This is born out that the virus rate in MI is not substantially different than all the states that are NOT doing all these expanded, extra prohibitions and stuff people are protesting.
No one is saying we shouldn't have safety efforts to keep this from spreading and protect people etc. Not everything the MI governor has done increases the safety and health of people.
The reason the asymptomatic case increase is important is because it helps us forecast the overall impact of this. We don't shut down the world for the flu, and right now, it is appearing like the flu has a higher mortality rate than does this Covid-19. We'll have to get more and better data as time goes by to determine the actual mortality rate and the actual affect. For now, most states and countries have taken measures to reduce the spread, to "flatten the curve" to protect health systems, etc. Some places have gone overboard in mandating stuff that is of little real value in this fight. That is what we are talking about.
That's only true in the alternative reality of right wing propaganda -- which takes real facts and twists, distorts and exaggerates them to get the cult riled up. These rioters have been instigated and funded by far right activists. They need slapped in the face with the cold fish of reality.
By the way, Cuomo said it well. To paraphrase: "Your right to do and go wherever you want ends when it can cause my death."
The article is about France and here you go again frothing at the mouth about Trump who has nothing to do with France. Do you have to detour EVERY thread?
We all know exactly how you feel about anyone "not a Democrat". Give it a rest and maybe stay on topic. Whaddya think, could you?