Leaderboard

If anyone doesn't want their vaccine, at this point, fine. I'll take yours and if there's more to dole out I've got plenty of friends and family that want theirs ASAP too. While we're still supply-constrained and bottlenecked at distribution here early on, I honestly don't care if people decline it or not; that's on them. With a vaccine that's 95% effective honestly the people who get it don't have to give a f*ck if other people don't. I'll happy take mine and once my family is all vaccinated we can put the pandemic behind us while the Darwin Award winners of the world continue to be vulnerable. Unfortunately the people who get hurt most by that ultra-individualistic mindset are those who want the vaccine but are ineligible to get it at all (weird health conditions, etc.) or are so far down on the priority list that they won't have a chance for many months (young kids). I'd attempt to make the argument that, "Hey, everyone should get it to help your fellow man blah blah blah so we can reach some level of population immunity," but that ship has long sailed for far too many Americans. As a wise person once said, I don't know how to explain to you why you should care about other people. IMHO we should continue to follow the mostly age-based & somewhat job-based distribution plans but speed things up as much as humanly possible. If there are leftover vials at the end of the day, just jam that shit into anyone who wants it. 24/7 vaccination centers, etc. Don't let a single drop go to waste & try your best to make available vaccines = vaccines administered. It ain't doing anyone any good sitting in the fridge.

Fair point. My follow up question/thought is once the high risk are vaccinated (assumption is that group is fairly open to/diligent about getting vaccinated), then will the lower risk group who remains unvaccinated really drain resources (because that’s also the same group who is hospitalized at a significantly lower rate)? Is the unvaccinated population the root cause, or is it the gov enacting policies that aren’t rational (especially in the near future as high risk populations are vaccinated), but don’t affect them personally/even benefit them in some ways? It behooves people to be skeptical when the gov says, “just do this because we said so, or else (fill in threats...)!” The above is to generate thought/discussion, not an argument...since it can be difficult to tell by words alone.

Well, this is what happens when you get media reports every day of only the bad things that happen. “Doctor has major reaction to Covid Vaccine” then you read the article and the dude is allergic to everything under the sun and then uses his own epi-pen to snap himself out of anaphylactic shock. Or the nurse that passed out when she got the vaccine. Oh my God! Apparently she has passed out after every vaccine she’s ever had. My wife (an RN) got it last week. No issues. Someday I’ll get mine and it’ll take it’s place next to like 20 anthrax boosters, so much yellow fever, flu, whatever that one they inject into your ass cheek that feels like a lump of peanut butter, and the rest. As the article states, the politicizing of this whole thing makes me laugh. Some of the same folks I know that are virtue signaling mask-shamers that want me to stop the spread and stay at home and not kill grandma are the same ones that won’t take the vaccine...that will stop the spread...so we don’t have to stay home...and we don’t kill grandma... But whatever. People make choices. Some people like Burger King more than McDonalds. It’ll be funny when you can’t board a plane or enter another country without one though...

I am not disagreeing with many of your points. And I, along with many of you, are plenty well off. I get that. No shit we all have Roth IRAs and TSP and retirement and stable socialized jobs that allow us, very fortuitously, to be some of the lucky people in society. But most people can't, and that's the problem. To just say there is no limit to wealth in society and entirely detach from reality by saying that how much the top 1% makes isn't connected to how much the working class makes is asinine. Because if they had incentives to give that money to workers as opposed to stock buybacks or letting it sit in stock options, maybe society would be better? Also, it's not like the system we have today has been around for very long, yet you guys talk like it's holy and could never be altered. Since 1913 to now, the top end capital gains tax has ranged from 13%-77%. The personal income tax for the highest bracket has ranged from less than 10% to greater than 90%. My argument is that Reaganomics and the policies that were implemented in the last 40 years have disproportionately helped the rich while making it harder to live and generate wealth for the vast majority of future and younger generations. That is the argument I want you to address. For example, Millenials only hold 3% of total US wealth, whereas baby boomers held 21% if you go back in time to when they were the same age. https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-less-wealth-net-worth-compared-to-boomers-2019-12 Purchasing power hasn't change at all in decades. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most-us-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/ Inflation adjusted home costs have risen nearly 40% in the last few decades. https://dqydj.com/historical-home-prices/ Education costs have tripled since 1980, after adjusting for inflation. https://educationdata.org/average-cost-of-college These all began their upward trajectory after we decided that horse and sparrow (which literally comes from the sparrow getting to eat out of the horse's shit) economics (reaganomics) were what we were going to do as a nation. My argument is that these are real, society defining, problematic issues that we need to address. We can fix some of these problems with the right market and governmental incentives/tax structure. Or you guys can keep hanging on to republican/neo-liberal fiscal conservatism which just saw over 20% of all circulating US dollars created just this year along with $4T in debt and the Fed swelling to over $7T. This is a crisis that you guys aren't addressing because your TSP appeared to go up in value, and I want to know why or when you think the current system will improve. Finally, here's an additional hypothetical to one of your points: Why not just give the trillions directly to billionaires and the top 0.1% only because they're the "job creators" (actually pretty close to what already happens with large company bailouts of people like Boeing that just did stock buybacks over the last 10 years; socialize losses, privatize gains, right)? Don't give literally anyone else money, especially working class. Those billionaires, by the logic in this thread, will create all the jobs and totally donate to charity and fix the roads and trickle all over society if they just have a little more money.

this x1000. the government is ridiculous. close small businesses....keep PACKED costcos and walmarts open. close poker rooms...keep the craps tables open WTF?! close down beaches?! wear a mask while jogging on isolated running trails?! government doesn't know all, doesn't have your best interests, doesn't know how to keep you safe, and doesn't care about taking away your liberty. and the lockdowns haven't worked, but people preach at you like locking down HARDER will work BETTER. crazy man. it really is incredible how easily it is to influence a large swath of the population to blindly follow bullshit.

That another person is rich does not make me poor.

It absolutely was a mistake. But at least we're not stuck in that fucking quagmire 20 years later, completely wasting our blood, money, time and assets...

Ok Bernie Bro.

The simple answer is because our country politicized this from the beginning. Had this been taken seriously by leadership, people would be doing more to help each other. Instead, it's a political issue to show your allegiance with your side...

You’re not trying to use common sense here are you?

That’s exactly right and its a great point. I am always suspicious when the language used to describe a topic changes. Like global warming/climate change or gun control/gun safety.

I 100% agree with you. The inconsistencies you stated drive me insane. I still can’t wrap my head around people I saw this summer wearing masks while hiking and looking at me like I had three heads for not wearing a mask. Outside, in a 15-20 kt breeze, in the sunlight, further than 6 feet. YGBFSM. As a longtime youth and high school coach, I HATE what we are doing to the kids up here in the northeast. Let them play. I’m thankful both my kids were able to go to school in person part time and skate/play fall ball. A lot of kids lost that opportunity. But, the only way I can see to get out from under this utter stupidity is to make the numbers of people in the ICU and the numbers of people dying go down. If we vaccinate the high risk, then (hopefully) if they get Covid they just get sick and get better since their body now knows how to fight it. If we get the healthcare providers, they will hopefully only get mild cases and be less contagious over time. We get the vaccine to the rest of the folks and maybe people have to confidence fo fly, go to school, teach, etc. The media has stoked this panic for months and has worked people up into a lather and incompetence in the government at a lot of levels have gotten us to where we are. Now people just watch the metrics. Where I live we are at like a 10% positivity. Over the summer it was like 0.8 and it took forever to open up. It’s going the wrong direction, and like you said, I do not want to see another lockdown.

I care about overall vaccination numbers because even once I’m vaccinated, my unvaccinated neighbors will continue to fill up hospitals and drain resources from the local all the way up to the national level. I care about those numbers because if a large percentage of the population remains unvaccinated, that will extend policies requiring social distancing, mask wearing, and continue to hobble the economy. It really seems pretty simple to me: If you want your life back, get your vaccine and encourage your family, friends, coworkers, and neighbors to get it too.

Wow. Insane. Thanks for the clarification. Please pass on our congrats from at least myself. I’m sure some if not all the rest of Baseops contributors would think the same. What an amazing careers you guys have Huggy.

Stuff is cheap, there's enough here for five people, nice apple flavor too. https://www.tractorsupply.com/tsc/product/durvet-ivermectin-paste-187-608-g?cm_vc=-10005

I've also been surprised at the number of medical staff at my hospital have refused the vaccine so far. I would peg it at 10-20% though the actual number could be higher. We gave people a chance to wait and not outright decline the vaccine though I know soon we will require an official declination. I have no idea how many people will change their mind once they see their coworkers get both rounds (our second round starts tomorrow) and see that they don't turn into a 5G tower. Some states have done a better job than others at this: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/ . It's interesting to see it isn't really a red vs blue thing on distribution (SD and ME are both doing really well). I now think that our desire to get the vaccine to "the right people" is slowing down the effort, especially if the "right" people are dragging their feet. Give them a chance and move on if they don't want it right then. To my knowledge in my 4 hospital system we haven't wasted a dose because we couldn't find an arm to put it in. But we have had to go to some lengths to find one last person to get vaccinated at each shot clinic.

There's a limit, but it changes with societal expectations and how people who are disadvantaged perceive their situation. If those at the bottom feel exploited and that their situation is desperate, they may resort to other means to close the gap. Unionization, protests, strikes, or perhaps violence against management and company assets. Or it could be as simple as quitting and moving to another field/company where they feel better appreciated/compensated for their efforts if that option is available (not like we don't see that with AF pilots jumping ship for the airlines...and we've never seen pilots that leave be denegrated by leadership as unpatriotic...) Is some of that illegal? Sure, but if people are desperate, they'll do desperate things, and it's not unprecedented. How history looks back on their actions depends on who wins-the line between freedom fighter and terrorist is a very thin line. We're not there yet in the US, though it feels like we're moving that way.

https://www.fortcrookipms.com/ckfinder/userfiles/files/2017/Cherry Girl.pdf

Just unwilling to entertain your state controlling the means of production socialism BS.

You're right. The Texas delegation would pitch a fit if we said we were closing a squadron at Dyess for any reason.

It’s not the zero sum game you’re portraying.

Except for the fact that the pie size is not fixed....especially in a time when so much "free money" has been pumped into the system by the Fed. So, no...someone getting richer does not mandate someone else getting poorer.

Man, I must be immoral for making money on the stock market this year. 🙄

Ultralord flies his 1,000th U-2 sortie. Old guys rule.

Was surprised to learn my 72 and 74 year old parents were both called to Jury duty in this debacle. Like really? That wasn't an obvious thing to dismiss people over 65, hell maybe even 55 for?

Well it is, though, actually... https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/climate/green-new-deal-questions-answers.html https://www.npr.org/2019/02/07/691997301/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-releases-green-new-deal-outline This effort has the support of many "center" democrats such as Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Mazie Hirono, Ron Wyden, Richard Blumenthal, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Tom Udall, etc. Of course the reality is that group is actually extreme, though few in the mainstream democratic party would place those individuals into the SJW twitter mob...or would they? https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/education/free-college-tuition-four-year/ Plenty of other "mainstream" democrats support the notion of "free" public college. https://www.vox.com/2019/4/22/18509196/elizabeth-warren-debt-free-college Liz Warren wants to give this subsidy to those making between 100-250K/yr...seriously? Forgive me, but this is what passes as "mainstream" now-a-days, so the push back from the right is completely understandable. Even the language that is used around these topics is deceiving. They call it debt "cancellation" when it reality it is more accurately classified as transfer.

The original vision for the association was mixed support to FTU and ops, and we had half the squadron aligned with and actively flying the FTU mission. But RegAF asked us to support the combat squadron exclusively, and at that time most of our FTU augments pulled chocks because they weren't looking to deploy at that stage of their lives. The billets that came from the 9th/28th were vacant UMD billets that hadn't actually been filled by AFPC in some time. It cost the 28th zero actual personnel, the requirement for the 28th to maintain some people CMR to support 9th deployments went away, and seeing as the B-Course classes are 1/3rd smaller now and the FTU is out of the TX and FIC flying business, the demand signal on the FTU is demonstrably down. When we were told to support the combat squadron we naturally adjusted our hiring strategy and brought in more off the street and crossflow guys, so naturally we need our instructors to instruct our non-instructors... Not to mention supporting MQT, upgrade, FIC etc. at the 9th [who we associate with, not are "part of"]. And we are required by our MAJCOM to fly our own Flying Hour Program, so while we did the rainbow crew thing as we were standing up [we're still "standing up," we've only gotten to 2/3rds of our planned footprint so far], now sometimes we just need our instructors butts in seats, flying the line, making RAP, and getting CT. Instructor CT is a good thing... Especially when we rainbow up in the deployed arena as we should. When we've gotten a specific request from the FTU that we could actually support (i.e. not three months ago, when we were deployed) we've sent people... Case in point, two of our IWSOs flew with them this month. And two of our new hires (1x IP/1x IWSO) are going to live/work primarily in the FTU (with the caveat that they have to stay CMR and will have to deploy). But our force structure can't change on a dime just because one year RegAF wants us all-in on ops and two years later new local leadership wants us back in the schoolhouse in a big way... Especially because while RegAF's near rock may be FTU production, AFRC's long game is B-21 involvement and at Dyess that means Ops/Test/WIC, not FTU. There are two parties to this association, and AFRC is not going to let the other party unilaterally dictate our priorities. RegAF needs our Ops/Mx manpower and we need RegAF's iron, so we each hold some of the cards, and we (ARC) know we aren't going to get everything we want, but when y'all don't get everything you want it isn't because we have bad attitudes. It's because we're pursuing our organizational interests (from Sq to NAF to MAJCOM) like any rational group of people.

Which is kind of the core problem, IMHO. "Black lives matter" as a concept is really not controversial in any way. Yes, anyone who believes that all humans are individuals and of equal objective value philosophically can confidently agree with that. We might disagree on the degree to which the statement relies on an unproven implication that society inherently values the lives of individuals with a certain skin pigment less than other individuals with a different skin pigment, but that's leading us down a different path of discussion Unfortunately, "Black Lives Matter", the organization and movement is something that is completely different and stands for something that is completely different than the plain English phrase means (as evidenced by their now-deleted "what we believe" webpage. So, just like with a lot of sophistry used in the name of advocacy, not being in support of "Black Lives Matter" (the organization) gets to be weaponized against whomever states it as "racist" (or whatever other word from the deplorables litany one wishes to arm themselves with) by intentionally co-mingling the concept with the org.

Is it hand cranked?

It’s a good thing AFPC is so good at this talent management thing that they won’t consider anyone else’s ideas.