The U.S. Tried to Build a New Fleet of Ventilators. The Mission Failed.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Lumenari

Considering the source is part of critical thinking.

Absolutely. But discounting information because it is reported in a source designated ''fake'' by some who do not like that information is not critical thinking. It's just like always voting dem or repub as in voting the party line.

Even you knew that when you saw the source.

Of course I did. I have not automatically trusted big media for decades. That goes for the Times as well.

But yea... I'm the bad person in this scenario.

No, not a bad person but rather a person who by their own admission is willing to forego their own critical thinking because they do not have the faith in themselves to consider the information on it's own merits.

Seriously? You think certain people can't tell the difference between false words and deception and truth? Many here and in the rest of the world know a lie instantly when it is told, and it doesn't matter what the source is. A person "not liking" some so called information is not how discerning what a lie is, works. Plus information doesn't have merit no matter where it comes from. Information is either true or false and knowing what that information is (truth or lie) is not based on a merit system.
If that were true then all information would be automatically deemed false no matter where it came from on this planet.

Seriously? You think certain people can't tell the difference between false words and deception and truth?

Yes seriously. There are many many people who cannot. Haven't you ever met any people who can't? Why do you suppose that history is riddled with con men and hucksters.

Many here and in the rest of the world know a lie instantly when it is told, and it doesn't matter what the source is.

Certainly. And many people do not .

A person "not liking" some so called information is not how discerning what a lie is, works.

The not liking is often called a personal bias, right? When information comes to us we evaluate it according to our already estsablished beliefs. If it fits with current beliefs is is more easily deemed true, if it does not, it is more easily deemed false or untrue. . a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

a reply to: FyreByrd

Ha...you're probably going to regret asking me that. I see possible motive in those leads -- and I am speaking only about the unpreparedness in the response to this pandemic.

Obviously, things are still playing out though. None-the-less, the shortage of masks and ventilators have been huge problems and handled sloppily by the very same people who 'are working' to solve this crisis. Naturally, that makes me very suspicious.

Maybe I should have finished my comment with this link.

And this link.

I suspect I'll eventually have to throw in this link, at some point. It remains to be seen how the government overreaching plays out.

***

None of it interests me for partisan reasons - the opposite, really. I don't know if that's why you asked, but I tend to tune out when someone offers information processed through a biased-partisan filter. But, of course, my interests are likely not the same as your's...or anyone else's. It's rare (read as: never) that I meet someone able/willing to accept my premise for all things touching on politics.

That said, this much I know to be true though: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump -- they have all been deceptive about sharing common goals. I know this from my own personal experience. I know it to be true because I trust my own eyes -- no one can convince me that up is down. And I don't mean that figuratively.

Since I know (for myself) that much is true, you can imagine the impact on what I find to be interesting by way of 'leads.' I don't care for party politics. I don't see one party as superior.

My premise is that all is going exactly to plan, nothing is backfiring, nothing is out of control, and there is no person, party, nor government standing in the way of 'common goals.'

So, in my view, a shortage of ventilators, is part of the plan playing out. The possible leads I posted may speak to motive.

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: FyreByrd

You stating that the New York Times is a reputable outlet made me skip the rest of your OP.

I'm assuming capitalism bad, socialism good?

Yep.. Let me help you...

their focus on maximizing profits is not always consistent with the government’s goal of preparing for a future crisis.

"Profit" the true evil of the private sector.

originally posted by: snarky412
Our healthcare system has been lacking for years, long before this administration came into office.

No excuse whatsoever to run out of the basic needs like masks!!

I'm not so sure...No one planned for this across the last 5 administrations. We are not planning for a asteroid strike either, or massive EMP from the sun etc etc...Sometimes we run with something only when it happens and at first it sucks but we quickly spool up to over come.

So lets say we kept 500 million n95 masks in storage it would cost about 750 million per year to maintain that stock pile.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: snarky412
Our healthcare system has been lacking for years, long before this administration came into office.

No excuse whatsoever to run out of the basic needs like masks!!

I'm not so sure...No one planned for this across the last 5 administrations. We are not planning for a asteroid strike either, or massive EMP from the sun etc etc...Sometimes we run with something only when it happens and at first it sucks but we quickly spool up to over come.

It was planned for under Bush II and Obama, but....

President Obama created the Pandemic Preparedness Office in the National Security Council in 2016 after criticism from Republicans regarding his administration’s response to the Ebola crisis.

In 2018 President Trump disbanded it either to save money or because he hates all things Obama - who knows?

www.thenewstribune.com...

originally posted by: FyreByrd


In 2018 President Trump disbanded it either to save money or because he hates all things Obama - who knows?

Actually he didn't... It was moved... He didn't touch it lol...

If you want to throw something, Obama dodged a bullet and didn't react afterwards.