Here are a few things that have been rattling around in my mind recently. Your thoughts and comments are welcome! Thanks for visiting! - Jeff Wagner
Thursday, December 2, 2021
Covid Comparsion: 2020 and 2021
Monday, February 1, 2021
Covid-19: One Year Later
According to the Santa Clara Health Department, this past weekend marked the 1st anniversary of Santa Clara County’s first official Covid case, so I thought I’d take a look at where we’re at, number-wise, in the country, state and county. The intent is not to insinuate, suggest, or imply anything. Just to report the numbers. I’m taking Covid as serious as anyone. I wear a mask in public places, and avoid public places as much as possible. BUT….
I will dine outdoors on occasion, attend outdoor church services, get take out, go to Starbucks, shop at a retail store and all of that good stuff. In moderation. Despite the seriousness of the situation, I think it’s equally important to support our local businesses as well.
One message I am hoping to convey here is not to panic. It’s serious, do your part, but don’t overreact. Which is hard to do with the press and social media posting a running case and death total on their front pages everyday for a year now. Unfortunately, you never see an “active” number posted, i.e. the number of people who currently have Covid, which is a fraction of the total. Several organizations attempt to post the number of recovered, and I've included a couple of them here.
So I hope you find this interesting and maybe even educational. Note that the numbers below are as of January 29, 2021.
UNITED STATES
- Total cases: 25,615,268
- World Meter estimated recovered: 16,196,528
- University of Virginia estimated recovered: 22,370,648
- % of total population (330.06 million): 7.8%
- Case % by age:
- 22.6% 18-29
- 16.4% 30-39
- 10.1% 17 and under
- 49.1% are 39 and under
- Cases by sex:
- 52.3% female
- 47.7% male
- Total deaths: 431,619
- % of all USA cases: 1.68%
- Death by age:
- 81.1% of deaths are 65+
- Death by Gender:
- 54% male
- 46% female
Takeaways:
- With over 330 million people in the United States, the 25+ million total case number represents 7.8% of the total population. Again, that is not indicative of how many people currently have the virus.
- Although very few states report the people who have recovered, two organizations have come up with “formulas” that estimate that number.
- World Meter estimates that of the 25,615,268 cases, 16,196,528 have recovered.
- The University of Virginia is a little more optimistic, estimating the recovered number at 22,370,648.
- That would mean that just over 9 million or 3 million people currently have Covid-19. If either of those numbers are true, or at least close to being true, then either 2.7% or 0.9% of the population currently has Covid-19.
- Nearly half (49.1%) of the Covid cases consist of people under 39 years of age. Nearly one in four are under 29.
- The mortality (death) rate in the United States at 1.68%. In other words, 1.68 out of every 100 Covid cases have been fatal. Or, if you are a glass half full person, 98.32 out of every 100 people who has gotten Covid has survived. As low as those percentages sound, and they are compared to other outbreaks, we can’t forget that over 400,000 people in the US still have died. We are very fortunate those numbers aren’t higher, however. Here’s how Covid compares to recent, albeit much smaller, outbreaks:
- SARS (2002 -2004) mortality rate: 9.6%
- Ebola (2014 – 2016) mortality rate: 40.4%
- MERs (2012-2015) mortality rate: 34.4%
- Swine Flu (2009) mortality rate: 0.2%
- 81.1% of all deaths are people over 65.
- Although fewer men than women have gotten Covid (47%), more men have passed away from it (54%).
CALIFORNIA
- Total cases: 3,205,947
- World Meter estimated recovered: 1,545,316
- University of Virginia estimated recovered: 2,757,963
- % of USA cases: 12.5%
- % of state population (31.51 million): 10.17%
- Five LA area counties: 1,898,744 (59.2% of state cases)
- Five LA area counties + San Diego county: 2,131,711 (66.5% of state cases)
- 58% of cases are 18-49
- 55% of cases are Latino
- Total deaths: 39,578
- % of all cases: 1.23%
- 46% deaths are Latino
- 48% cases are male; 58% deaths are male
- 75% of deaths are 65+
Takeaways:
- California’s 3.2 million cases represent 10% of the state’s population. If the recovered estimates listed above are correct, that would mean either 4.2% or 1.1% of the state’s population currently is infected.
- The state total case number represents 12.5% of the cases in the United States.
- Nearly 60% of the cases in the state are located in the five Los Angeles-area counties. If you include San Diego County, the number goes up to 66.5%.
- Nearly 60% of all cases are people under 49.
- 55% of all cases and 46% of all deaths are Latino.
- The mortality rate in California is 1.23%, below the countries 1.68%.
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
- Total cases: 100,470 (6th of 58 counties)
- University of Virginia estimated recovered: 84,253
- % of state cases (3,205,947): 3.13%
- % of county population (1.9 million): 5.3%
- Case % by age
- 19.4% 20-29
- 18.0% 19 and under
- 17.5% 30-39
- 54.9% are 39 and under
- Case % by Ethnicity:
- 51% Latino
- 16.1% Asian
- 12.9% White
- Total deaths: 1,344
- % of all SC county cases: 1.34%
- % of all state cases: 0.04%
- By Ethnicity:
- 32% White
- 28.6% Latino
- 24% Asian
- 48.7% cases are male; 51.5% deaths are male
- 87.6% of deaths are 60+
- Underlying health conditions
- 71.9% (1 or more)
- 19.6% (none)
- 8.5% (unknown)
Takeaways:
- To their credit, Santa Clara County breaks down their Covid numbers into a little more detail than the state does.
- Just over 5% of the county’s residents have contracted the virus since January, 2020. If the recovered estimate listed above is correct, then 0.8% of the county’s population is currently infected.
- Although the largest county north of Los Angeles, Santa Clara County’s case total comprises just 3% of the state’s total cases.
- Like in the state, over half of the total cases are Latino.
- Nearly 55% of the cases are people under 39 years of age.
- Over 87% of the deaths are people over 60.
- Nearly 72% of the people who have died had at least one underlying condition, while 20% didn’t have any.
Thursday, November 8, 2018
A few after-thoughts from this week’s election....
as you will! Mainly just wanted to get them off of my chest. You're more than welcome to leave feedback in the comments section after this blog if you'd like.
In other words, two years from now I don't want to hear anything about Trump infidelity from the left. If it didn't matter to you now, it shouldn't matter to you then. Fair is fair!
Prop. 6: I certainly don’t have an issue spending our dollars on road repairs, but only if I get a chance to decide, like we have in bond measures from past elections (almost all of them is seems like). This prop would have required a vote for any future state fuel or vehicle tax increase, while overturning a Governor Brown signed bill in which he and our legislators conveniently decided to spend our tax dollars for us. I personally don’t go for that, and am surprised the majority of voters evidently have no issue with it. Plus there’s nothing stopping them from doing it again. See next item for more.
Political Ads: Although I can’t prove it, I get a hunch from talking with people that many voters base their vote on the political jargon they receive in the mail and see on TV. Sorry, but for those who do that: that’s not enough! Needless to say, these ads are completely biased and one-sided. There are two sides to every story and each voter needs to understand both sides before deciding! I really wonder how many people actually sit down and spend a few minutes on the internet and do that before making an educated decision. Prop. 6 is a good example of this (I think). Way more anti-prop 6 ads on TV then pro, all using scare tactics threatening voters that our roads will fall apart if prop 6 passes. Big words for something that’s barely been around a year. And many people took it to heart without researching it themselves. Sure, road fixtures could be affected, but certainly nothing imminent, and nothing an appropriate ballot-based bill couldn’t fix. Again I can’t prove it, although I’m sure there’s data out there, but I bet that the politicians and prop supporters who get the most air and print time win most of the elections. They know people are visual, want quick information, and many won’t spend the time doing actual research.
Voting for a name: Ronald Reagan, Sonny Bono, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Clint Eastwood, Fred Grandy, Jerry Springer, Al Franken, Jesse “the body” Ventura, Donald Trump. What do they all have in common? All initially elected to office with no political experience (half of them in California). Why? People recognize them, and for some reason, think in some odd way that they actually know them, and as a result can trust them. They are completely inexperienced, but people don’t seem to care. It seems to me that a similar phenomenon may apply with veteran politicians as well. I can’t prove this either, but I believe there is a point when some voters see someone like Diane Feinstein on the ballot, they automatically vote for them because “they must be doing something good”, they know who they are, and take some sort of comfort in having them there. As a result, they don’t even bother to research them, or more importantly their opponent, who because of that, and the fact they can’t compete financially to promote themselves, have basically no chance of winning. And I bet if you ask a typical voter to name five accomplishments from the recent term of an incumbent's they are about to vote for, they couldn’t do it. Not all voters of course, but I suspect many. And I’ve certainly been guilty of that in the past.
Which brings me to my question. I wonder how many people took the time to research John Cox, Kevin de Leon and Lisa Remmer during this election? These are the folks the well known Newsom, Feinstein and Pelosi easily defeated yesterday. How many people voted for these three names simply because they knew who they were? I actually have no clue. But I do question that, particularly when it involves politicians who have held the same office for 15, 20+ years. Sure, it could be because they have actually done a lot of good things while in office. But I have a hunch it’s mostly out of comfort and content.
Pelosi: Her winning, although not a surprise, is still very alarming to me. She’s made it very clear, even this week, that she wants to see the Republican party ruined. First, that will never happen. She is extraordinarily naive if she thinks otherwise. Neither party is going anywhere. And since that’s the case, the best thing is to set up an environment where both parties can work together to help America and it’s citizens prosper. I like to think that most Americans actually want that. But with destructive attitudes like Nancy Pelosi’s, Hillary Clinton’s and others on both sides of the fence, this will never happen as long as they are in office. Yet people continue to vote for them. I don’t get it. Ugh!!
Thursday, August 25, 2016
Music to My Ears
I was born in 1960 in a family of musical lovers. My parents were not musicians, but my uncle "Shorty Joe Quartuccio" was a fairly popular country-western performer in the bay area beginning in the 1940's. He sang and was buddies with such legends as Hank Williams Sr., Lefty Frizzell, and the Sons of the Pioneers.However, it was jazz that was most prominent in our house during the 60's, a well as Andy Williams, Johnny Mathis, and several other crooners of the time. Country would make it's way onto our record player from time-to-time, but it was mostly jazz and vocal standards. So that's what I was most exposed to during the first 10 years of my life.
A Taste of Honey
My very first memory of music was also my introduction to jazz as well. Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass (TJB) were a very popular instrumental jazz/pop crossover group throughout the 1960's that featured, in case you've never heard of them, trumpeter Herb Alpert and his six piece band. They were a unique combination of contemporary, Latin and New Orleans jazz all wrapped into one. Standards like The Lonely Bull, Tijuana Taxi, Spanish Flea, Lollipops and Roses and A Taste of Honey are still classics today. These and many other TJB tunes, mixed in with a little Dave Brubeck and Wes Montgomery, all provide the strongest music memories for me as a kid.In the late 1960's/early 1970's, that would change to everything played on AM KLOK radio.
Ironically, my first interest in drumming came because of the TJB. I specifically remember toward the end of my first decade pulling out a couple of unsharpened pencils (they had to be unsharpened) and "shadow drumming" to many TJB tunes. It's a great thrill for me to be able to play along with them today on a real set of drums. Oh, and yes, I still like them!
My sister, who is three years younger than I, went off in a completely different direction in music interest. She went the FM radio route and enjoyed the contemporary pop and rock stations of the time like KLIV and KOME. While I was still listening to the Everley Brothers and the Beach Boys, she was listening to Aerosmith and Kiss.
In 1977, another group began to catch my ear: Pink Floyd. I had of course been aware of their Dark Side of the Moon success in 1973, but it didn't do much for me at the time. Their new album "Animals", however, was. My sister actually owned it and I would frequently hear her playing it in her room. "Animals" featured more instrumentals than vocals, which really appealed to my old jazz side. But David Gilmour's riveting, emotionally-charged guitar playing is what really appealed to me. He's still my favorite rock guitarist.
As you probably noticed, neither David Bowie, Lynyrd Skynyrd nor Pink Floyd appear on the list. I don't remember Bowie appearing in the bay area much, if at all, during that time (I finally did see him in the mid 1990's). I didn't get a chance to see Lynyrd Skynyrd, who was pretty much over as a band after their 1977 plane crash. Pink Floyd, however, was my biggest regret. I remember sitting at a Golden State Warriors game in early 1978 and seeing a promotion on the overhead for an upcoming Pink Floyd concert at the arena as part of their "Animals" tour. For whatever reason, I didn't or couldn't go, and thought I'd catch them the next time they were in town. Unfortunately, unbeknownst to me, there would be no next time. At least with the original group. They did tour in 1981 for "The Wall", but not in the bay area, and I didn't want to travel to the nearest show in Los Angeles. So I basically blew my chance. I did see them in 1992, but without Roger Waters. Good show, but not the same. Wednesday, December 2, 2015
ISIS: A Surprising Reaction from an Unexpected Source
Two respectable resources have recently released data indicating an increased uneasiness from Muslims in the heavily Islamic regions listed in the text box above.
- Life.Church, the creators of YouVersion and the popular Bible app, this week announced a couple of amazing facts. First, their Bible app surpassed 200 million total downloads. Secondly, the country that has experienced the greatest increase in Bible App growth is Iran, with a download increase of 1,886% in 2015 (from 2014).
- Created in 2004, Global Media Outreach (GMO) has become the largest provider of online evangelism and discipleship. GMO basically provides an avenue for people all over the world to access information on Christianity, request prayer, and even become a Christian with the help of "online missionaries", or Christians who communicate with them via email. I've actually been involved with GMO since 2010, and have communicated with nearly 1,600 people worldwide, including 367 from India, 104 from Nigeria, and over 50 from Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Syria combined.
Regardless, it'll be interesting to follow this in the coming months and years to see if this trend really does continue.
Sunday, October 18, 2015
2015 Writings
The following PDF files, ranging from 5-29 pages, are what I've written so far. And although I'm obviously a "faith-based" person, I tried to use the most reliable, unbiased online resources I could find.
My most recent writing is one called "A Knock on the Door", where I list the five questions I would ask a Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, Muslim, and Christian the next time they come knocking on my door. You can find it here: A Knock on the Door.
Here's a list of my other writings:
- Making a Believer Out of Me - the top seven things that led me to Christianity in 2003.
- Are We Really Good Enough? - a closer look at sin, sinners, and salvation,
- Hobby Lobby and the Supreme Court - a closer look at contraceptives, abortion, and the 2014 Supreme Court Ruling.
- Relationships and the Bible - a closer look at sexual immorality and Biblical marriage.
- Early Influence - a closer look on the state of religion in the United States at the time of our country's birth, whether our "founding fathers" were at all influenced by it, and how the constitution relates to it.
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Is the "Rock and Roll Hall-of-Fame" really for Rock and Roll?
With the announcement this week of the 2014 class of performers to be inducted into the "Rock and Roll Hall-of-Fame" (Cat Stevens, Hall and Oats, Nirvana, Kiss, Linda Ronstadt, and Peter Gabriel), I felt it was a good time to discuss a few issues and questions I have with and for the Rock and Roll Hall-of-Fame (RRHOF) Foundation.As you may or may not know, the RRHOF resides in Cleveland, Ohio and began voting in recipients in 1986. Since then, 719 people, 295 performers, and 104 groups have been inducted. Which brings me to my first question. The induction of 295 performers over a 27 year period averages about 11 per year. At that rate, isn't every performer going to be in the RRHOF at some point in the future? I would hope that the RRHOF foundation will decide sometime soon to start inducting fewer people (five or less) each year to preserve the dignity of the hall. If not, we'll start to see more and more mediocre acts being inducted, and the quality of the RRHOF will slowly be diluted.
My next question to the RRHOF would be a pretty basic one: "What is your definition of Rock and Roll"? I only ask, because here are a few of the performers who have been inducted into the hall since its initiation: Nat King Cole, Billie Holiday, The Supremes, The Temptations, The Platters, The Four Tops, The Four Seasons, Gladys Knight and the Pips, the Bee Gees, Brenda Lee, Donna Summer, The O'Jays, The Ronettes, Run-D.M.C, and Abba. All great and even legendary performers in their own right, but Rock and Rollers? Pop Hall-of-Fame, Rap Hall-of-Fame, Soul Hall-of-Fame, Hip Hop Hall-of-Fame, R&B Hall-of-Fame for sure. Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? I'm not too sure about that.
"Artists become eligible for induction 25 years after the release of their first record. Criteria include the influence and significance of the artists’ contributions to the development and perpetuation of rock and roll. The RRHOF Foundation's nominating committee selects nominees each year in the Performer category. Ballots are then sent to an international voting body of more than 600 artists, historians and members of the music industry. Those performers who receive the highest number of votes are inducted." That is the extent of the RRHOF Foundation's explanation of their voting/induction process. What is considered a high number of votes? Is there a minimum number of votes needed to be elected? If not, who determines which performers have the "highest number of votes" for any given year? Where's the cut off? Inquiring minds want to know!Finally, what do the following list of performers have in common: The Doobie Brothers, Chicago, Yes, Emerson, Lake and Palmer (ELP), Jethro Tull, The Cars, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Journey, Dire Straits, Bad Company, the Electric Light Orchestra (ELO), Styx, and Kansas? None, I repeat, none, are in the RRHOF! That's stunning to me. What's even more outrageous is that outside of Yes, NONE of them have ever been nominated! And all but The Cars and Dire Straits have been eligible for over 15 years now! How can this be? How can some, if not all of these groups be omitted? They certainly fit the RRHOF Foundation's criteria of "Artists become eligible for induction 25 years after the release of their first record. Criteria include the influence and significance of the artists’ contributions to the development and perpetuation of rock and roll. " Sure, some of the groups border on pop (Chicago, Dire Straits) or New Age (The Cars), but no more than any other group already in the RRHOF (The Beach Boys, The Bee Gees, Abba, Simon and Garfunkel, Earth, Wind and Fire, Beastie Boys, Hall and Oates this year, or any of the other members mentioned earlier).
Aerosmith and Queen were inducted 12 years ago.The Talking Heads and Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers 11 years ago. The Police and AC/DC 10 years ago. ZZ Top in 2004 and The Pretenders in 2005. Blonde in 2006. Van Halen in 2007. Genesis in 2010. Kiss and Hall and Oates this year. I'm a fan of most of these groups, and all probably should be in the RRHOF at some point, but is there really a good argument for any of them being inducted before Chicago, The Doobie Brothers or Yes? And not just elected, but some 10 years (and counting) before them? I have a hard time finding one.
Unfortunately, I don't have the answers to any of my questions above. I wish I did! If you fish around the internet, you'll find various opinions, including some who believe the whole process is very political with grudges and favorites existing throughout the music industry. That I could believe and would actually make some sense. Regardless, being a big fan of music, and especially rock-and-roll, the RRHOF's process has always been a perplexing one to me. Not to mention a bit vague!
So there you go.....my gripes and confusion with the RRHOF Foundation. I feel much better now! Feel free to chime in with your thoughts!
Good links:
- RRHOF Snub list: http://www.futurerocklegends.com/The_Snub_List.php
- RRHOF Overview page: http://www.rockhall.com/inductees/
