• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

The Coronavirus thread

I believe approximately 500,000 cars enter San Francisco on normal days, with an average of 1.4 people per car because the carpool benefits are yuuuge. That's 700,000 people.

"That's not 2 million!"

Yeah, but San Francisco also has a place for bums to live, ehh, I mean, public transportation, BART. BART has about 450,000 travelers per day, meaning about 225,000 each way, each day.

That's about 1 million people per day traveling into and out of San Francisco for WORK. Add in tourism of tens of thousands per day, Floggy.
 
oh, and, Floggy, that article only focuses on people commuting via vehicle. What about tourists? Do people not visit San Francisco? Do they not walk around the ****-filled streets? You focus on one small segment and declare a victory. Idiot.
 
Troglodyte said:
You continue to just make **** up, Tim. 3-5x as many people work in San Fran than live there? Obvious nonsense. 2.3 - 4 MILLION people are NOT commuting into and out of San Fran. How? Logistically, how does that happen? What’s your source?

www.kqed.org

Visualization: How San Francisco's Population Changes Throughout the Day | KQED

San Francisco's about to get a lot more crowded. Roughly a million visitors are expected to flood into the Bay Area for Super Bowl week, which start on Monday in advance of the big game in Santa Clara on February 7. And, obviously, that's not the norm. But even during the course of a regular
www.kqed.org www.kqed.org
Click to expand...

Floggy is now arguing that no one commutes into San Francisco. I swear, I feel like a college professor in a Special Olympics class.

Every other urban city in the nation has massive commuting. But San Francisco has none. It is a stagnant city, likely with big walls up around it. 885,000 people live there and never leave. All of the jobs in San Fran are filled by the 885,000 people that live there. There are no visitors to San Fran. Nope. None. No one goes to the Wharf or to visit the museums. Public transportation is only for the 885K residents. NO ONE crosses the bridges daily to get into the city.

1626793532246.png

Whoops...

1626793327862.png

Paul Idiot Krugman compared the head of that dick in the map above to San Dakota (what the **** is that), comparing an apple to an orange, and by God Floggy is gonna die on another hill.

Meanwhile, that bay area above continues to struggle with COVID.

San Dakota continues to kick *** and show that just perhaps, their strategy was far better...as...we have been saying....all along.

Bay Area Today:

1626793633789.png

San Francisco County: Averaging 110 cases per day, 12 per 100K/population

San Dakota:

1626793717649.png

San Dakota is averaging 16 cases per day, 2 per 100K/population

It's not even a contest, but Paul Krugman has people believing some fairy tale ****.
 
Last edited:
Steeltime said:
Add in tourism of tens of thousands per day, Floggy.
Click to expand...

26 Million people visit San Francisco a year and spend close to $10Billion.

But San Francisco is like a BLM rally. COVID don't be spread there, not like at Sturgis. San Francisco is COVID free...in Floggy World.
 
Superman said:
oh, and, Floggy, that article only focuses on people commuting via vehicle. What about tourists? Do people not visit San Francisco? Do they not walk around the ****-filled streets? You focus on one small segment and declare a victory. Idiot.
Click to expand...

Yep. And what about BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)? I rode with an Uber driver in my last visit to San Francisco, swears he was Uber's #1 grossing driver 2 years in a row. He broke all the rules, working 12 hour days 4 days in a row, then takes 3 day weekends. I made the mistake of renting a car on that trip. Took me nearly 2 hours to get to my hotel in downtown San Fran. I ubered the rest of the trip.

That city is a fucken mess and congested as ****. Hate San Fran. Love Manhattan.
 
Tim Steelersfan said:
Yep. And what about BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)? I rode with an Uber driver in my last visit to San Francisco, swears he was Uber's #1 grossing driver 2 years in a row. He broke all the rules, working 12 hour days 4 days in a row, then takes 3 day weekends. I made the mistake of renting a car on that trip. Took me nearly 2 hours to get to my hotel in downtown San Fran. I ubered the rest of the trip.

That city is a fucken mess and congested as ****. Hate San Fran. Love Manhattan.
Click to expand...
 
Any comparison of San Francisco and South Dakota is kind of stupid, they aren't much a like. Any area that had millions of visitors during covid should have had higher rates
of cases and deaths because outside visitors expand the opportunities for residents of an area to catch the virus. I expect San Francisco had far fewer commuters and visitors during the pandemic, because many jobs are high-tech and those were the first companies that moved to work from home and tourism had to be way down because people were not traveling and being discouraged from traveling. Most of the arguments from both sides regarding San Fran/SD seem kind of looney.
 
Tim Steelersfan said:
I made the mistake of renting a car on that trip. Took me nearly 2 hours to get to my hotel in downtown San Fran.
Click to expand...

Yep. That is why I stated Floggy seems never to have been to San Francisco. Seriously, anybody who doubts the number of people commuting into San Francisco has never been there, or is a total ******* idiot liar, possibly both.

I used to live 90 minutes east of San Francisco, went there probably 4-5x per year once I learned to drive, have had numerous depositions in San Francisco, and have experienced the wonders of its traffic more times than I care to remember. The mantra for that area is, "Be there by 7:00 or be late." 10:00 a.m. deposition? "Be there by 7:00 a.m. or be late," meaning if you think you are going to leave [wherever] at 9:00 a.m. and get there on time, wake up - bullshit.
 
Steeltime said:
The mortality rate among the infected is pretty close - something TSF and I believed likely about 18 months ago. The problem is that the Chinese scientists were very successful - VERY successful - in engineering the virus with the CGG-CGG genome to make it virulently contagious. I underestimated the degree of evil of the Chinese scientists and did not give them enough credit for making the virus so contagious, to insure maximum transmission and chaos, so the number of deaths is much higher due to the lab-made contagion properties of the virus, NOT the mortality rate (as idiots like Floggy argued for months).
Click to expand...
Go back to the beginning of this thread: it's the flu, bro.
Same bs then and now, many mental masturbations later, with relatively little health impact on the folks posting here ( cuz it's the flu).
Glad you agree
 
Confluence said:
Go back to the beginning of this thread: it's the flu, bro.
Same bs then and now, many mental masturbations later, with relatively little health impact on the folks posting here ( cuz it's the flu).
Glad you agree
Click to expand...
God I live for them.
 
Who is ready for this one?
news.google.com

Google News

Comprehensive up-to-date news coverage, aggregated from sources all over the world by Google News.
news.google.com news.google.com
 
Superman said:
your cute little link (HOLY ****, YOU'RE LEARNING TO PROVIDE LINKS!!!) shows 368k people on movement into and out of San Francisco per day, Over the course of one week, that's 1.8 million people commuting into and out of the city.

does that mesh with your silly argument of people moving into and out of South Dakota?
Click to expand...
So nowhere near the millions per day Tim’s been insisting. And it’s not a different 368k people commuting each day, so 1.8 million per week is nonsense.
 
Steeltime said:
I believe approximately 500,000 cars enter San Francisco on normal days, with an average of 1.4 people per car because the carpool benefits are yuuuge. That's 700,000 people.

"That's not 2 million!"

Yeah, but San Francisco also has a place for bums to live, ehh, I mean, public transportation, BART. BART has about 450,000 travelers per day, meaning about 225,000 each way, each day.

That's about 1 million people per day traveling into and out of San Francisco for WORK. Add in tourism of tens of thousands per day, Floggy.
Click to expand...
“I believe” is much like Timstrawmanfan’s “let’s say”. Superstrawman has implemented a link rule. What is your source?
 
Tim Steelersfan said:
Floggy is now arguing that no one commutes into San Francisco. I swear, I feel like a college professor in a Special Olympics class.

Every other urban city in the nation has massive commuting. But San Francisco has none. It is a stagnant city, likely with big walls up around it. 885,000 people live there and never leave. All of the jobs in San Fran are filled by the 885,000 people that live there. There are no visitors to San Fran. Nope. None. No one goes to the Wharf or to visit the museums. Public transportation is only for the 885K residents. NO ONE crosses the bridges daily to get into the city.

View attachment 5740

Whoops...

View attachment 5739

Paul Idiot Krugman compared the head of that dick in the map above to San Dakota (what the **** is that), comparing an apple to an orange, and by God Floggy is gonna die on another hill.

Meanwhile, that bay area above continues to struggle with COVID.

San Dakota continues to kick *** and show that just perhaps, their strategy was far better...as...we have been saying....all along.

Bay Area Today:

View attachment 5741

San Francisco County: Averaging 110 cases per day, 12 per 100K/population

San Dakota:

View attachment 5742

San Dakota is averaging 16 cases per day, 2 per 100K/population

It's not even a contest, but Paul Krugman has people believing some fairy tale ****.
Click to expand...
Another strawman. Support your ridiculous multiple millions figure with a source.

2 vs.12 CASES per 100,000 now justifies 4 times as many deaths over the course of the pandemic? Nice logic, Tim.
 
21STEELERS21 said:
Any comparison of San Francisco and South Dakota is kind of stupid, they aren't much a like. Any area that had millions of visitors during covid should have had higher rates
of cases and deaths because outside visitors expand the opportunities for residents of an area to catch the virus. I expect San Francisco had far fewer commuters and visitors during the pandemic, because many jobs are high-tech and those were the first companies that moved to work from home and tourism had to be way down because people were not traveling and being discouraged from traveling. Most of the arguments from both sides regarding San Fran/SD seem kind of looney.
Click to expand...
The original comparison was their population, which is the same.
 
Troglodyte said:
Another strawman. Support your ridiculous multiple millions figure with a source.

2 vs.12 CASES per 100,000 now justifies 4 times as many deaths over the course of the pandemic? Nice logic, Tim.
Click to expand...

No strawman involved. I've provided you data. You provided a bullshit source.

Just in tourism alone, the city has nearly 30 million visitors a year. It is the 3rd worst rated commuter city in the country.

And you argue ain't nobody coming to San Francisco each day, it's a bubble, much like you've professed to be living in.

You love dying on hills don't you.
 
Tim Steelersfan said:
Who would be so shallow as to post a HIT pic just to get likes?
Click to expand...

Some perverse SOBs, that's who:

iu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top