• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Holy Crap. Florida State/Georgia Tech Football. Tons of fans without masks. It's like Sturgis.

jonny5 said:
Not far ahead. 200 more deaths per MILLION people. And again, California has more new cases and new deaths than Florida, twice as many, even though their sports fans wear masks. Isnt that the OPs point? Fans without Masks.

For some reason Florida is a punching bag. Clearly its because our Governor is a Republican. Not science or facts.
Click to expand...

Very far ahead because this 200 fewer deaths per million (actually closer to 230) for a state with 40 million population translates to 8,000 fewer deaths which is like more than twice the 9/11 casualties or three times the 9/11 casualties if we use the more accurate numbers of 230 fewer deaths per million.

That is far ahead in my book...
 
pamak said:
Very far ahead because this 200 fewer deaths per million (actually closer to 230) for a state with 40 million population translates to 8,000 fewer deaths which is like more than twice the 9/11 casualties or three times the 9/11 casualties if we use the more accurate numbers of 230 fewer deaths per million.

That is far ahead in my book...
Click to expand...

Except CA has MORE deaths and more new deaths...1500 more. So like half 9/11. So Florida has less deaths, but a higher rate since less people. Which would you rather have? Less deaths or less deaths per million?

And again, to the topic, this is with "Sturgis like mask wearing".
 
jonny5 said:
Except CA has MORE deaths and more new deaths...1500 more. So like half 9/11. So Florida has less deaths, but a higher rate since less people. Which would you rather have? Less deaths or less deaths per million?

And again, to the topic, this is with "Sturgis like mask wearing".
Click to expand...

You cannot reasonably compare absolute number of deaths among states (or countries) of different population. CA has the largest population among all states in the US. That is why the proper comparison is number of deaths per million.

WE cannot discuss any topic logically if we do not agree about basic things.
 
pamak said:
You cannot reasonably compare absolute number of deaths among states (or countries) of different population. CA has the largest population among all states in the US. That is why the proper comparison is number of deaths per million.

WE cannot discuss any topic logically if we do not agree about basic things.
Click to expand...

More than one comparison is proper. You're just cherry picking the one that supports you. The total picture is that both states are doing relatively fine. 300, 600, 1000 deaths per million is very little. So florida is marginally worse on that stat than California, better than the national average, way better than the northeast, and better than California on other stats.

The question remains. Do you want less deaths per million or less deaths?
 
jonny5 said:
More than one comparison is proper. You're just cherry picking the one that supports you. The total picture is that both states are doing relatively fine. 300, 600, 1000 deaths per million is very little. So florida is marginally worse on that stat than California, better than the national average, way better than the northeast, and better than California on other stats.

The question remains. Do you want less deaths per million or less deaths?
Click to expand...

No!

When you have states of unequal population it is irrational to compare the absolute number of deaths. This is not about cherry picking. It is about common logic!

For the SAME population, less deaths per million also means less deaths. So, if California had Florida's performance , it woulld have about 9,000 more deaths!
 
Last edited:
pamak said:
No!

When you have states of unequal population it is irrational to compare the absolute number of deaths. This is not about cherry picking. It is about common logic!

For the SAME population, less deaths per million also means less deaths. So, if California had Florida's performance , it woulld have about 9,000 more deaths!
Click to expand...

But it has LESS deaths. Seems pretty obvious that LESS death is better than MORE death.
 
jonny5 said:
But it has LESS deaths. Seems pretty obvious that LESS death is better than MORE death.
Click to expand...

No it is not!

What is better?

Be a part of a team of 10 people who suffer 3 deaths or be a member of a team of 30 people who suffer 4 deaths ?
By your logic, 3 deaths are less than 4 thus you would prefer to be in the smaller team...which does not make sense.

It is the probability of dying which make things better or worse for reasonable people. This is why the figure of deaths per million is used to compare mortality between different populations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom