pogi

I am not sure what you read, but Isn't that almost exactly what I said: "Hi, I am calling to inform you that your child may have been exposed to someone infected with Covid while at school...watch for any signs of infection and get tested if any present themselves...Make sure they wear a mask and practice other preventive measures"...or something like that. You are not understanding what I am saying. There is no such thing as a "close contact low risk". There are low risk contacts however. They are not considered "close contacts". Your suggestion is that all low risk contacts should be contacted and informed of potential exposure. I am simply suggesting that it serves no pragmatic purpose to do so.

It is not an indictment of marriage, but neither does it preclude it (as you seem to think that slavery precludes capitalism or vise versa). My purpose and point is not to indict capitalism. I believe slavery could exist in any system that is willing to dehumanize people and view them as commodities. All the capitalistic principles which you suggest preclude slavery were existent in the ideals and foundation of America. Our founding Father's believed in those principles and owned slaves. These founding principles and slavery are demonstrably not mutually exclusive. They opened the door to capitalism and helped capitalism to thrive in America, but in no way did they preclude slavery. History demonstrates that they are not "incompatible". Again, my point is not to indict capitalism, but more to acknowledge the enduring effects of slavery on American economics.

I just think this is silly perception of what should be required. Going to school in a pandemic naturally is a given presumed risk of exposure and infection, no need for a call every time a potential exposure happens. Parents may be getting several calls a day when school opens. What good will it serve to call about every single low-risk exposure? Here is what happens in those low risk calls - Contact Tracer: "Hi, I am calling to inform you that your child may have been exposed to someone infected with Covid while at school." Parent: "Who were they exposed to?" Contact tracer: "I can't tell you that because of HIPPA laws, but they are considered low-risk and don't need to quarantine or do anything different at this time." Parent: "Why are you calling me if you can't tell me anything useful?" Contact tracer: "We are just calling to inform you of a potential exposure." Parent: "We are in a pandemic with wide-spread transmission. They are in school with kids passing them all over the place in narrow hallways and stacked like sardines in classrooms, I am aware that they have likely ongoing exposures". Contact tracer: "Umm, ok, well watch for any signs of infection and get tested if any present themselves." Parent: "No kidding (with a sarcastic tone)? Anything else? Contact tracer: "Make sure they wear a mask and practice other preventive measures." Parent: "Serious (said again with a sarcastic tone)?" Contact tracer: "Ok, well thank you, bye!" 10 minutes to 1 week later...same call happens from a different Contact tracer...and on and on... Total waste of time. Why waste our time making those individual calls, (which practically speaking do absolutely nothing other than potentially create anxiety and don't necessarily reduce any risk of transmission), when we could simply make a general announcement that all students should assume ongoing low risk exposures while at school and monitor for symptoms daily, and that they will be notified of any high-risk exposures. If we have to call every low risk exposure, families will be getting calls on a weekly basis, and potentially multiple times a day, for different low risk exposures to different students/faculty. It is a waste of time and resources, and families will quickly become annoyed at the number of calls. Every student in the school will have a low risk exposure in a matter of weeks. Those exposures will be ongoing throughout the year.

Yet, it existed in it and was perpetuated by it for some time. Yes, greed (as you say), etc. helped perpetuate slavery, but it is the capitalistic system that nourished greed and allowed it to run rampant. It is all intertwined. What principles of capitalism are not compatible with slavery? Your quote mentioned that "the ethical and political principles that support capitalism are inconsistent with slavery", but those principles are not the same thing as capitalism per se. These political principles are partly outlined in the declaration of independence, and yet slavery thrived despite it. They are more political principles than capitalistic. They may help capitalism thrive, but they are not capitalistic by definition. A "belief in the dignity of human beings" does not describe capitalism. It describes a belief.

Right, I must have misunderstood you. I thought you were saying they would not be made aware of contacts period. I guess I am unclear as to what your objection is to this? That is how all contact tracing is done County wide, not just in schools. In the beginning stages, when numbers were low, we actually were contacting all contacts, even low-risk ones, but as numbers grew, that became impractical. We had to focus our resources on the highest risk contacts, or there is no way we could keep up with the numbers. That is the best we can do with the resources we have. Imagine the number of potential low-risk contacts in a school setting, and the number of parent's that would need to be notified is astronomical. Could you imagine the logistics of having to notify every student's parents about every potential low-risk contact they might have had at school? It's just not realistic. You are right, I just looked up the guidelines: That is pretty weak sauce. It is equivalent to saying "masks are not forbidden". In Utah, we at least have the Area Presidency who asked us to wear masks in pubic (that includes church). So, while not technically required, it creates a stronger expectation.

Are you suggesting that the South was not capitalistic?

I hear you, but I have a hard time thinking of an acceptable alternative. We have to think long-term here as this virus is not going away any time soon. If kids are not in school, many will simply replace daycare for school, which will not be much of a help in controlling spread. With working parents, many don't have other alternatives. I think the best solution is to do a hybrid system of on-line learning and in-class school where we could cut attendance by 1/3 if we have 2 days on-line and 1 day in-class. There really is no good answer to this problem. Every solution seem to creates more problems.

If it wasn't capitalistic greed that perpetuated slavery, then what did? We could debate whether capitalism played a role in ending slavery, but I don't think it played much of a role. Slavery didn't end because it became unprofitable. It took the South over 70 years before they could match the slave-era production of cotton. Let the meet packing plants etc. own slaves today and they would surely turn a capitalistic profit from their "commodities" fairly quickly, industrial revolution and all. Much of the seed money that funded industrialization, came from slavery profits. That got us into the game quick and early. While I am a fan of capitalism, I can't pretend as if the foundation of slavery didn't help make us the economic powerhouse we are today. We are at least beholden to give credit to the lives of the slaves who helped build America. They at least deserve that after all that was taken from them. https://www.nhpr.org/post/without-slavery-would-us-be-leading-economic-power#stream/0 The other half of the story: https://www.amazon.com/The-Half-Never-Been-Told/dp/046500296X/?tag=wburorg-20

E. A disgruntled future missionary who really wanted to serve abroad just got called to Boise Idaho and just really needed to vent out some frustration.

More bad news as we learn from accumulating evidence: So, this shows evidence that kids may be just as likely to spread the disease (with 100 X as much virus in upper respiratory tracts - maybe way more likely to spread the disease under 5 years old). This article does state that it doesn't necessarily prove that children are passing the virus to others. This was published on 7/30. The very next day (7/31) the CDC published a finding which demonstrates that they are indeed transmitting it, and may play an "important role in transmission": 1 overnight summer camp with 597 in attendance - within 2 weeks of attendance at the over nighter, nearly half of them (260) tested positive for Covid. And not all of them tested either, the actual numbers may be higher. This should send shivers through the spines of school boards. I have a feeling we have some dark days ahead when school starts.

Wasn't the King James Bible written in Early Modern English?

Are you sure sacrament preparation doesn't require masks? I thought it did. Yes, there can be some leakage through masks, that doesn't mean that they are not at all effective at reducing risk. Just because precautionary measures are not 100% effective, doesn't mean they are not worth doing. Condoms aren't 100% effective either, maybe people should not be concerned about wearing them. It is my understanding that high-risk close contacts to infected teachers and students will be contacted by the school (who will be performing their own contact tracing). They will not be allowed to know who they had contact with as that is a violation of HIPPA, but their families will be informed of the exposure and educated. I think you are misunderstanding the guidelines. Simply because someone does not meet the criteria of a high-risk close contact, it doesn't mean they are not at risk. You mentioned previously that it doesn't matter if a person is wearing a mask or not if they are within 6 feet for more than 15 minutes, they are still considered a close contact. That is true, they are considered a close contact, but "close contacts" are further defined as "high-risk" and "medium-risk". A close contact who is consistently using recommended precautions (wearing a mask) is considered medium-risk. Mask precautions do matter and make a difference.

No one is saying that you shouldn't be concerned in that scenario. While you are not considered a high risk close contact, you are still considered a contact at risk (low risk). You could still potentially get infected as a low risk contact, we just don't go to the extreme of requiring quarantine for you. I still understand the animosity towards people who refuse to wear masks, even if the casual contact risk is considered low, they are still putting people at unnecessary risk. It just feels disrespectful.

And some meditate and pray. Smart investment. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.livescience.com/amp/psilocybin-depression-breakthrough-therapy.html

You can believe I am a hypocrite too if it makes you feel better. But I’ll need a CFR if you want to convince me. Or, you can kindly retract.