Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

We should explode one of those and measure - i'm not taking their word for it

That's a reasonable response,but if there are man made cures there could be man made curses.In 1939 who would have thought by 1945 there would be jet propulsion and an ICBM in the form of the V-2s from a nation of 75 million?Yet that same nation had a an assembly line for killing innocents wholesale.What could be expected to from a country of 1.4 billion today with access to some of the same technology we possess

So you're saying you believe it's man-made? Or you just consider that in the realm of possibilities? 

It's certainly plausible Mr Director. Do you really think the Wuhan welcome wagon will swing open the great wall gates and let us have a look see at their biologigical warfare operations.And do you think if our Government knew it was likely they'd tell this country that has already hamstrung itself by the very people who could spread one around by more rioting- sounds reasonable

China is behaving exactly how our leadership would if the roles were reversed.

Lots of people have claimed that they were like Reagan.  Lots of people (including Obama) have tried to assume the mantle of Lincoln as well.  It doesn't make them like Reagan or like Lincoln.  Obama was not known for being excessively dedicated to telling the truth.
I honestly don't know that you mean when you use terms like "liberal" and "conservative."  And I can't tell which you hate more.
I didn't say that we had socialized medicine.  I said that Reagan was against "socialized medicine" (note the quotation marks).  He was against real-life Medicare and he would have been against real-life ObamaCare too.
What you think about the 2010 election is different than what I think about it.  We can't both be right, and we might both be wrong.  I'll just note that you offer no evidence for your thinking, but I'll offer a bit for mine.  The Tea Party was the driving force in the 2010 election, and its rhetoric was about ObamaCare far more than it was about the state of the economy.  I went to a couple of Tea Party rallies, and they didn't mention the economy at all.
We'll just have to be disappointed in him for different reasons.

I absolutely believe Reagan would have been pro Obamacare.  Here's why: 

Reagan opposed Medicare for two principal reasons: participation was mandatory, and because Medicare spent scarce taxpayer funds to subsidize coverage for wealthy people who didn’t need the help.

So we can gather from this quote that Reagan probably would have been against the individual mandate, which no longer exists anyway.  However, I think he would have approved of most of it.  Reagan explicitly supported the role of government in subsidizing care for every American who could not otherwise afford it.


Quote from "A Time for Choosing"
“No one in this country should be denied medical care for lack of funds.”

In a speech to the Phoenix chamber of commerce:
“Any person in the United States who requires medical attention and cannot provide for himself should have it provided for him.”

He championed the Kerr-Mills Act of 1960, a law introduced by two Democrats that gave federal money to states with which to provide medical care for the elderly in need. Reagan said that he was “in favor of this bill — and if the money isn’t enough, I think we should put up more.”


In fact, CW, I bet you would also be in favor of 90% of Obamacare provisions.  When this was going into effect it was my job to analyze the potential impact to my employer at the time, so I am very familiar with it.

Some study shows the shut down prevented (delayed?) 60 million infections, which might mean 600,000 deaths (give or take).  I could believe that I think.  Another claimed it saved over 3 million lives in Europe.  That one if a bit tougher to believe, but maybe.

Sweden is better on cases but worse on deaths than the US per million pop.  They did distance in Sweden, so it's not as if they did nothing at all.  They are at 465 deaths per million in Sweden.  That rate here would be 152,000 deaths.  If Europe had done what Sweden did with the same results (which is unlikely), they would not have had 3 million deaths.  Spain, Italy, and the UK are worse off in deaths per million than is Sweden.

I don't know why their apparent mortality rate is higher than in the US.  They had fewer tests per capita.  At times, comparisons between countries can be influenced by how numbers are derived and counted.

No, you're wrong.  This isn't my opinion. Experts in the field and multiple scientific studies present quite a bit of evidence this was a naturally occurring mutation.

There is zero evidence otherwise.

There are experts who do think otherwise. 

China is behaving exactly how our leadership would if the roles were reversed.

Maybe you could move there, and let us know for sure? All in the name of research, of course.