To the same degree that most people, if not all, experienced in previous generations?

I think we stress about different things. But our tolerance for being uncomfortable has gone down because the solution is so readily available.

I haven't read the other replies yet but yes, I think our tolerance for things have gone down. These days we don't have to be uncomfortable hardly ever. Our homes and are cars are climate controlled. Many of us rarely experience true hunger as food is so readily available. If we have a question, google can answer it immediately. It seems like many of our needs can be met immediately. If that's all you know, being uncomfortable is going to feel like a big deal. And if things get really bad, it may be beyond our ability to cope.

So you are expecting the social distancing to eliminate COVID completely, assuming we do it long enough? Do you have a source for this? Are there doctors and scientists saying this as well?

Is there proof that it was deliberate? Honest question.

.

I am really sorry to hear this. That is awful. From what I understand all of this social distancing and staying at home is meant to "flatten the curve" so as not to overwhelm the hospitals. But this will continue to spread and a lot of people are going to get sick. It's an unfortunate fact. Using one person's illness as proof of other's selfishness isn't really fair.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2020/03/25/summit-county-orders/ "Anyone who violates the order can be charged with a Class B misdemeanor. In Utah, that is punishable by up to six months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000."

I disagree then on what the government has the right to do to its people.

Getting together in groups MIGHT result in spreading COVID which MIGHT result in someone's death. But it's not a given. This not even remotely comparable to drunk driving or domestic abuse. There's a difference between telling people they have a patriotic duty to stay home and charging people with a misdemeanor for gathering at a park.

Do you assume that everything the government asks you to do is morally right?

Years ago I read Left to Tell by Immaculée Ilibagiza. It's her story of the Rwandaan genocide. One of the most shocking thing to me was how quickly neighbors turned against neighbors and slaughtered them!! I know this is not that. But the government encouraging citizens to turn on each other is not the direction we need to be heading. Even a little bit.

I can't decide if this is funny or incredibly disturbing that people think it's funny. In Summit County, UT they are issuing a shelter-in-place order that is a class B misdemeanor if ignored. WTH?

Most people I interact with on social media are posting about their social isolation and coping fairly well. I understand that some people don't think this is a big deal. But when you have to get permission from your government to leave the house.... it's mind blowing. And really, it ought to bother people that the government is asking people to turn each other in.

Personally, I think encouraging people to turn each other in for being in groups is every bit as scary as this pandemic.

We were pretty desperate to get out yesterday so we drove 45 minutes to go play in a river. All public access areas were closed. We were 20 minutes outside city limits. I was kinda pissed, TBH.

Just ordered some frisbees for my son who is teaching his puppy to catch them. They arrived quickly.

I am paying my kids inflated wages to do deep cleaning chores around the house. 😄

My otherwise healthy brother was hospitalized for 3 days with pneumonia. His first COVID test from 10 days ago is not back. I think they either lost it or lied about testing him. The hospital did another one 3 days ago but we have not heard results. The strangest thing to me is that they are saying it is not COVID based on his xrays. Two different doctors in 2 different hospitals who looked at them said COVID pneumonia presents differently than regular pneumonia. I haven't seen that anywhere online though. I am seriously questioning the numbers that being published about our state though.

I don't know. But I made a grocery store run yesterday and was a little freaked out to see that life was going on a normal. I think maybe I expected zombies or something.

I do sympathize with the working moms who are now working from home who are expected to simultaneously teach their kids with the extra time they don't really have. It would be a difficult transition especially when it's not something you wanted to ever do.

I have offered some unsolicited advice. A friend of mine was lamenting over the packets sent home for her kindergartner and the tears that ensued. I told her school at home shouldn't suck and to ditch the packets and just read and play. I would not neccesarily suggest the same thing for upper elementary kids and beyond, but that would definitely be my plan for kindergarteners who hate packets.

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/03/study-getting-flu-shot-2-years-row-may-lower-protection https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4387051/

I don't know why you assume that someone who who has concerns about school lunch programs doesn't also have issues with corporate welfare. I think if we're gonna feed the poor kids at school (which seems to be a large percentage in a lot of schools) let's just feed all the kids. Let's make it part of the regular school system budget that everyone is served a free hot lunch at school unless you prefer your homemade lunch. And make it a good lunch, dang it. I think I would prefer that over these programs where kids who don't actually "need" the snacks and meals are practically begged to participate so that their schools continue to get special funding. It concerns me that when parents can't or won't do something for their kids, the solution is for the government to take over the responsibility and do it for them. We should be doing something to lift the whole family and help the parents to become more self-sufficient. I will admit that I don't know what that is or how that would look though on a community wide scale. But I worry about encouraging a sense of dependence upon the government.

I feel the same way you do. And it's all made worse when I feel like the government does a poor and inefficient job at solving it. When DH was teaching in an inner-city school they wanted him to encourage all kids to take food items during snack time, even if they didn't eat them, so that the school could get their funding. What kind of message does that send to kids when we tell them to take it and just throw it away?