States with strictest lockdowns ruined livelihoods — without saving lives

It is rather sad when one cannot see beyond one’s own circumstances to see the greater need in the world. Especially one who pretends moral superiority.

 

I thought you were a scientist who liked data? Seems the lockdowns didn't do much of anything. We should be honest enough to admit that, as fans of science, right?

 

An article purporting to show that restrictive states fared worse than less-restrictive states should show both.

Instead, it provides a link to a report. The report does not list the least restrictive states, nor even the most restrictive. It contains a table of data which is not only not ranked, it's not even aggregated.

Therefore, to identify the least restrictive states (and verify the most restrictive) would require totalling some 459 figures, ranking the resulting 51 totals, then aggregating those ranks with January ranks provided in a second link in the article.

As you are the one proffering this article as a credible source, I suggest you get your calculator out and show that it really is.

 

Nor apparently did you. Not in the right science any way.

 

You mean that people who work for a living and are successful must be evil because they don't why they should carry the deadbeats?
No doubt, every deadbeat agrees with you.

They also thing that believing that makes them morally superior. Ignorance is indeed bliss.

You aren't doing your image any good here.

 

????????????

Excess Deaths, from March 1st to Dec 31st, 2020

Nationally;

522,368 Excess Deaths
Excess Deaths Per 100,000 pop; 164.4
Percent of Excess Deaths attributed to Covid19; 72.4%

5 States with the highest percentage of excess deaths per 100,000 pop

1. Mississippi; 260
2. New Jersey; 251
3. New York; 249
4. Arizona; 221
5. Alabama; 219
6. Louisiana; 215

HOWEVER, among said group, Arizona has the highest percentage of non-covid excess deaths.......41%, and we will know why in approx. 6 months, thus, when the FINAL numbers of causes of deaths will be published.

Thus, what's forthcoming; A whole lot of partial and impartial comparisons.

 

They did. You can read their sources.

I'll write the NY Post and let them know that liberals are generally incapable of clicking links to underlying sources. I'm sure they will dumb down future articles for your benefit.

I posted math above. Did you ignore that, too?

 

However, the OP made one monumental mistake;

His conclusion; ''Lock downs saved no lives and cost lots of jobs''

AND IRONICALLY, among the (NO Lockdowns/NO Stay-at-home) States, North Dakota and South Dakota have a very high number of Excess Deaths, thus, due to their (NO Lockdowns/NO Stay-at-home)???????????

 

I said the article did not show show both the least and most restrictive states. Because it doesn't.

And neither does the linked-to report. It shows unranked, unaggregated data, requiring 459+ calculations to achieve a ranked list.

You have not posted the required math, hence nothing to ignore.

 

Hair splitting BS from people who didn't bother to read the article. Thanks

 

That is the whole point. One must ask if the very modest differences in those rates between least and most strict rules was worth the difference of 3% unemployment and 8%. Note that the states that took partial measures in between the most free and least free had the highest infection rates. It’s almost as if nothing we humans did other than develop vaccines and therapeutics made any difference at all.

 

So, liberals here didn't read the article.
Liberals here can't respond to my post on math about the death rates.
Liberals countered with ludicrous red herrings about infection rates, though that wasn't what the article was about.

Seems par for the course.

 

And the shops that sold pot. Those were essential too. At least in California.

 

Because COVID clearly knew the difference between someone going to church, someone going to a strip club, and Nancy Pelousy getting her hair did. COVID only attacked the church goers, according to liberals. Lap dances were A-OKAY.

 

Average year 2.875 million dead 2020 a little more than three million where is that 500k excess?

 

Number of deaths in 2019; 2,854,835

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm

According to the CDC, in 2020, approximately 3,358,814 deaths occurred in the United States.......Provisional

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70...m 2019 to 2020, the,(91.5 deaths per 100,000).

Grade 5 Math; 3.358 million MINUS 2.854 million = 504,000...........Provisional

Excess Deaths; According to this study, 522,368, released on April 2nd, 2021

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2778361

 

And, as the article showed, we put millions of people out of business to save 2,000 lives in five liberal states, assuming that their death counts weren't politicized and are 100% accurate.

 

Note those words provisional. On both totals...

 

Oh, so now we are going to talk about the purple nature of each state because the facts are inconvenient.

 

Rationally, lockdowns/stay-home orders have increased the Unemployment rate, and/or lowered the Employment rate.

What else needs to be rationally confirmed/acknowledged?

 

I'm not sure what you're asking.

 

Note average number of dead per year since 2001 has been 2.875

 

That's correct!

Therefore, your ''little more than three million'' is also provisional.

 

Are you out of your mind?

 

Oregon has had 59 deaths per hundred thousand. The average in the US is 175 deaths per hundred thousand. I would call that significantly better.