Another way the pandemic shutdown wasted huge amounts of money - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Provision of the two UN HDI indicators other than GNP.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15229195
I recently heard a story about a mother who has a special needs child. During the pandemic, when there were state-imposed shutdowns, she was not able to bring him to school or to temporary supervisory care. This special needs child occasionally had periods of emotional outbursts that could last for up to two days and the child was not always easy to control during these times. Sometimes the mother would bring him to a temporary care facility for half a day, a day, or sometimes leave him there overnight, when she was not able to deal with him, although she did not need to use that too often.

In order to be able to receive any help and have someone else supervise her son, the mother was forced to make the difficult decision to put him into full-time residential care, where he will permanently be away from the home and not see his mother. The child was put in residential care for two years. The school district paid $60,000 per year for the child to be there.

Obviously this situation was not practical or pragmatic. It was a bureaucratic cookie-cutter solution imposed from higher up (close all schools and temporary care facilities), and was not a cost-effective expenditure of money, it was extremely wasteful. This child did not need to be in full-time residential care, and the care he was receiving before cost only a fraction of that.

It's not just all a matter of money. This was not good for the child, to have to be separated from his mother. These residential facilities can be difficult places for special needs children to be.

I know there are many on the Left who don't seem to care at all about any amount of money being spent. But maybe think of it in these terms: This wasted money was money that could have been handed out to everyone for free, or allow the working class to pay lower taxes, or spent on something else that you care about. Government has a limited amount of money, and money wasted one place is going to mean somewhere else where that money can't be spent.

$60,000 a year is probably the entire amount of money the mother earned each year, before taxes. It's ridiculous that this was done.
#15229211
Puffer Fish wrote:I recently heard a story about a mother who has a special needs child. During the pandemic, when there were state-imposed shutdowns, she was not able to bring him to school or to temporary supervisory care. This special needs child occasionally had periods of emotional outbursts that could last for up to two days and the child was not always easy to control during these times. Sometimes the mother would bring him to a temporary care facility for half a day, a day, or sometimes leave him there overnight, when she was not able to deal with him, although she did not need to use that too often.

In order to be able to receive any help and have someone else supervise her son, the mother was forced to make the difficult decision to put him into full-time residential care, where he will permanently be away from the home and not see his mother. The child was put in residential care for two years. The school district paid $60,000 per year for the child to be there.

Obviously this situation was not practical or pragmatic. It was a bureaucratic cookie-cutter solution imposed from higher up (close all schools and temporary care facilities), and was not a cost-effective expenditure of money, it was extremely wasteful. This child did not need to be in full-time residential care, and the care he was receiving before cost only a fraction of that.

It's not just all a matter of money. This was not good for the child, to have to be separated from his mother. These residential facilities can be difficult places for special needs children to be.

I know there are many on the Left who don't seem to care at all about any amount of money being spent. But maybe think of it in these terms: This wasted money was money that could have been handed out to everyone for free, or allow the working class to pay lower taxes, or spent on something else that you care about. Government has a limited amount of money, and money wasted one place is going to mean somewhere else where that money can't be spent.

$60,000 a year is probably the entire amount of money the mother earned each year, before taxes. It's ridiculous that this was done.


It was pandemic there is what a million dead in the US, 6 million world wide (and that's unders) without shutdown you could quite a lot more deaths, without any measures 5 -10 times. The Economic losses form the extra deaths may well outweigh the money spent. There was massive costs for doing nothing.

There was no perfect strategy that would either protect everyone AND not have unintended costs for others.

Special Needs a children and the vulnerable tend to do were in hard times /emergencies because the system isn't well set up to help them in the best of times. The failure here was not being a robust special needs system well before the pandemic. Are you up for higher taxes to do that?

Do you actually care ? (ie welling to put your money in, vote for higher taxes) or are you just using these people to make a political point?
#15229224
pugsville wrote:It was pandemic there is what a million dead in the US, 6 million world wide

There is a huge disagreement over those deaths. They started counting many deaths as caused by the virus which were actually not. The total population death counts did not start going up until after the shutdown - many of those people were killed BY the shutdown (from loneliness, economic hardship, as hospitals delayed procedures and tests, etc).

And as you know many elderly people who were already in bad shape got a few years knocked off their lifespan.

But we can have this argument somewhere else.
#15229396
Puffer Fish wrote:There is a huge disagreement over those deaths. They started counting many deaths as caused by the virus which were actually not.
That is a lie and a myth that has been debunked a thousand times over. It's a false claim made by idiots, like you.

Claims that COVID death figures are inflated by counting those who died ‘with, not from’ the virus are premised on false assertions
Research shows overall deaths associated with COVID-19 have been undercounted, not overcounted, in the U.S. since the start of the pandemic.

Dying ‘with, not from’ COVID-19
The false notion that the numbers of people dying from COVID-19 have been skewed because they include people who died “with” rather than “from” COVID-19 dates to August 2020. That’s when then-President Donald Trump retweeted several posts that claimed the CDC was adjusting coronavirus deaths downward.

The claims were based on a federal report that indicated that of all Americans whose deaths were attributed to COVID-19 on their death certificates, only 6% did not also list other conditions as being factors.

https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2 ... eath-toll/


So in addition to being a rape cheerleader you hate old people too? :eh:
#15229425
Are you going to open a new thread every time you find an anecdote you want to share? There are 330,000,000 people in the USA, if you can only find one who was harmed by the lockdowns then it's a good policy. I'd argue that requiring children to miss a year of in person schooling to reduce the risk of a disease that barely affected them is a huge and unnecessary sacrifice to their intellectual and social development.
Roe V. Wade to be Overturned

@late @Saeko Here is an article on that topi[…]

2040 are the whites the minority. Not if th[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

It is claimed that Ukraine lost close to %70 of i[…]