CoronaBro Meltdown/SARS-Covid-19 Spitballing Thread

[yoga-like_abana]

Huh.  That seems pretty arbitrary so long as the other measures are being taken.  I can understand why bars/restaurants are throwing fits about that.

I pretty much agree but I think indoor dining should be shut down altogether and the bars and restaurants and their employees should be given money. This absolves the city/any other jurisdiction from having to provide any sort of support to the businesses but also lets them act like they're doing something.

I don't know what other tools KC has at their disposal until there's a vaccine.

Yeah that's at least consistent.  I don't see how the cost benefit calculus works out if we're letting people eat and drink indoors all day long but then shut things down at night.  The Blue Line (KC hockey bar) filed a lawsuit today in which they said that 40 percent of their business comes between 10 pm and 3 am.  Seems like a big price to pay for only a marginal benefit public health-wise.

Following your logic they shouldn’t have to close at 3 am either bc it’s arbitrary

3 am is arbitrary, but at least businesses understood that and had that expectation. 

In other words, they don't "lose 40% of their revenue" (and need to fire staff, etc.) by closing at 3 am.

Who determined it's a marginal benefit?

If you're open from 11am-10pm under certain circumstances, I just don't see why also being open from 10pm-3am under those same circumstances would present any additional significant risk.  If the rules are being followed/enforced, what's the difference?

So you don't remember Aggieville bars being different from 11a-10p and 10-2am? 

It sucks bars are losing revenue.  Many industries and people are with these restrictions.

Wear masks, make people sit at tables, limit capacity.  Aggieville 10-2 am would look different regardless.

even if the "rules" are followed people will be talking louder and more often from being drunk and not eating and therefore more likely to spread. I think dlew has been diagnosed with a good ol' case of willful ignorance

People talk louder when they're not eating? 

Listen, I'm not saying it's safe to drink at bars, I'm saying the idea that "it becomes significantly less safe for people to drink at bars after 10 pm" doesn't make sense to me.  If we say it's permissibly safe for 60 people to eat/drink in a bar all day long with the understanding that staff is required to enforce the rules, it doesn't follow to me that night time makes that significantly more dangerous.

If we're trusting bars/restaurants to enforce the rules on busy NFL sunday afternoons, then why not Friday at midnight?

Think the after 10pm crowd tends to become a little more inebriated and less likely to stay within the confines of their group is why they do it.

[The1BigWillie]

I received a photo from an acquaintance on Saturday night just before 10pm. Brewtop Pub in Overland Park was pretty much packed to the gills and not a mask in site. 

[ChiComCat]

You're working under the assumption that a bar/restaurant and their staff enforce the rules equally well in the afternoon as they do at night.  This is an absolutely wild assumption to me.

[michigancat]

even if the "rules" are followed people will be talking louder and more often from being drunk and not eating and therefore more likely to spread. I think dlew has been diagnosed with a good ol' case of willful ignorance

People talk louder when they're not eating? 

no but they'll probably talk more often

I received a photo from an acquaintance on Saturday night just before 10pm. Brewtop Pub in Overland Park was pretty much packed to the gills and not a mask in site. 

crazy that people aren't wearing masks at the place that exists to put stuff in your face

[DQ12]

You're working under the assumption that a bar/restaurant and their staff enforce the rules equally well in the afternoon as they do at night.  This is an absolutely wild assumption to me.

Yeah I guess if they can't/won't enforce it, they'd face a penalty, just like they would in the daytime.  It just seems nuts to me that the city is placing this hardship on the restaurant owners/employees. 

Maybe that's just where we're at, but crap that seems pretty unfair.  I don't blame bar owners for trying to seek some recourse before their business dies or they're forced to layoff swaths of their employees.

[Dugout DickStone]

So if someone knows how to use casenet you can get all the info for the webex TRO hearing next week....you know just in case.

[Cire]

Bars should be closed except for take out.

The federal government should be bailing out the owners and employees.

[DQ12]

So if someone knows how to use casenet you can get all the info for the webex TRO hearing next week....you know just in case.

yeah i'm gonna be making popcorn

[Trim]

So if someone knows how to use casenet you can get all the info for the webex TRO hearing next week....you know just in case.

yeah i'm gonna be making popcorn

Saul, get the gE chat working again. 5th grader design level is fine.

[mocat]

You're working under the assumption that a bar/restaurant and their staff enforce the rules equally well in the afternoon as they do at night.  This is an absolutely wild assumption to me.

Yeah I guess if they can't/won't enforce it, they'd face a penalty, just like they would in the daytime.  It just seems nuts to me that the city is placing this hardship on the restaurant owners/employees. 

Maybe that's just where we're at, but crap that seems pretty unfair.  I don't blame bar owners for trying to seek some recourse before their business dies or they're forced to layoff swaths of their employees.

the city is not putting this hardship on bars/restaurants. the virus is putting this hardship on them

[catastrophe]

It’s clearly arbitrary, but it’s probably also saving lives (even if a comparatively small number) while at least allowing bars to stay open.

And yes, for the most part allowing people to come into these places is not the main factor determining whether they thrive or fail. Many people aren’t coming simply because they’re not idiots.

[bucket]

You're working under the assumption that a bar/restaurant and their staff enforce the rules equally well in the afternoon as they do at night.  This is an absolutely wild assumption to me.

Yeah I guess if they can't/won't enforce it, they'd face a penalty, just like they would in the daytime.  It just seems nuts to me that the city is placing this hardship on the restaurant owners/employees. 

Maybe that's just where we're at, but crap that seems pretty unfair.  I don't blame bar owners for trying to seek some recourse before their business dies or they're forced to layoff swaths of their employees.

the city is not putting this hardship on bars/restaurants. the virus is putting this hardship on them

And the federal government

[Dugout DickStone]

It’s clearly arbitrary, but it’s probably also saving lives (even if a comparatively small number) while at least allowing bars to stay open.

And yes, for the most part allowing people to come into these places is not the main factor determining whether they thrive or fail. Many people aren’t coming simply because they’re not idiots.

The blue line is pretty dang busy well into the morning

[DQ12]

You're working under the assumption that a bar/restaurant and their staff enforce the rules equally well in the afternoon as they do at night.  This is an absolutely wild assumption to me.

Yeah I guess if they can't/won't enforce it, they'd face a penalty, just like they would in the daytime.  It just seems nuts to me that the city is placing this hardship on the restaurant owners/employees. 

Maybe that's just where we're at, but crap that seems pretty unfair.  I don't blame bar owners for trying to seek some recourse before their business dies or they're forced to layoff swaths of their employees.

the city is not putting this hardship on bars/restaurants. the virus is putting this hardship on them

I mean, in a very indirect sense, then kind of.  In the actual sense, it's the city's order prohibiting bars from opening past 10 that's stopping bars from opening past 10. 

[bucket]

You're working under the assumption that a bar/restaurant and their staff enforce the rules equally well in the afternoon as they do at night.  This is an absolutely wild assumption to me.

Yeah I guess if they can't/won't enforce it, they'd face a penalty, just like they would in the daytime.  It just seems nuts to me that the city is placing this hardship on the restaurant owners/employees. 

Maybe that's just where we're at, but crap that seems pretty unfair.  I don't blame bar owners for trying to seek some recourse before their business dies or they're forced to layoff swaths of their employees.

the city is not putting this hardship on bars/restaurants. the virus is putting this hardship on them

I mean, in a very indirect sense, then kind of.  In the actual sense, it's the city's order prohibiting bars from opening past 10 that's stopping bars from opening past 10.

Hospital capacity could be forcing KC's hand too. Not sure where that currently stands.

[DQ12]

You're working under the assumption that a bar/restaurant and their staff enforce the rules equally well in the afternoon as they do at night.  This is an absolutely wild assumption to me.

Yeah I guess if they can't/won't enforce it, they'd face a penalty, just like they would in the daytime.  It just seems nuts to me that the city is placing this hardship on the restaurant owners/employees. 

Maybe that's just where we're at, but crap that seems pretty unfair.  I don't blame bar owners for trying to seek some recourse before their business dies or they're forced to layoff swaths of their employees.

the city is not putting this hardship on bars/restaurants. the virus is putting this hardship on them

I mean, in a very indirect sense, then kind of.  In the actual sense, it's the city's order prohibiting bars from opening past 10 that's stopping bars from opening past 10.

Hospital capacity could be forcing KC's hand too. Not sure where that currently stands.

Hospitals (at least KU) are full as hell right now fwiw.

[Phil Titola]

the argument of "why do anything if you can't do everything?" is pretty lol

Because if what you're doing appears arbitrary and hurts people, it needs to be defended with something better than "people talk louder when they're drunk and not eating."

Also, we can "do everything."  If we want to shut down bars/restaurants, we can do that.  But letting them stay 60% open seems like the worst of both worlds.

The cost benefit just doesn't make sense to me.

If it's the worst of both worlds then bars are free to hibernate if it's worse than being open 60%.  Some restaurants have chosen to do so.  Sucks.  We all hate it.

[michigancat]

I don't blame bar owners for trying to seek some recourse before their business dies or they're forced to layoff swaths of their employees.

I don't blame them either!

[DQ12]

I don't blame bar owners for trying to seek some recourse before their business dies or they're forced to layoff swaths of their employees.

I don't blame them either!

I think you and I are speaking basically the same language here.  For you legalcats out there, I think this is basically analogous to a taking.

[Cire]

That's what Bailouts are for.

[Dugout DickStone]

I don't blame bar owners for trying to seek some recourse before their business dies or they're forced to layoff swaths of their employees.

I don't blame them either!

I think you and I are speaking basically the same language here.  For you legalcats out there, I think this is basically analogous to a taking.

The law says they have to close at 3am with no rona.  Is that a taking?

[DQ12]

I don't blame bar owners for trying to seek some recourse before their business dies or they're forced to layoff swaths of their employees.

I don't blame them either!

I think you and I are speaking basically the same language here.  For you legalcats out there, I think this is basically analogous to a taking.

The law says they have to close at 3am with no rona.  Is that a taking?

no because they have no reasonable expectation that they'd be allowed to stay open past 3. 

i recognize that this is a stretch of the takings doctrine, but it's the same equitable principles imo.

[Dugout DickStone]

I don't blame bar owners for trying to seek some recourse before their business dies or they're forced to layoff swaths of their employees.

I don't blame them either!

I think you and I are speaking basically the same language here.  For you legalcats out there, I think this is basically analogous to a taking.

The law says they have to close at 3am with no rona.  Is that a taking?

no because they have no reasonable expectation that they'd be allowed to stay open past 3. 

i recognize that this is a stretch of the takings doctrine, but it's the same equitable principles imo.

What if they change the law to Kansas and it moves to 2am after rona?

[nicname]

That’s Kansas. Looks to be trending pretty hard back down. Hard for me to see another spike this winter.

For comparison, South Dakota (State anti-coronabro deluxe) is significantly down from their peak from November.

Pic below...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nicname]

South Dakota.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk