Thanks, I hope so too. My therapist was a young woman from Pakistan, we got along quite well. I trusted her enough to be open about my issues and concerns, knowing there would be neither judgement nor easy acquiescence. Often I already knew the answer ;-)

Jake - the movie was 2001. Here's a link. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/

Thank you for your feedback.

Eddie - what you missed is that the $2000 a month, for four months, is being rolled out without questions to get it in the hands of the needy quickly. It's compensation for lost income. Eligibility will be assessed after, and if you didn't meet some of the criteria, then some will have to be repaid. As for seniors, the point is whether they are retired or not. This is compensation for income loss.

James - I believe some of my friends are acting selfishly. I get it, we are being asked to give up a lot - making short term sacrifice for the long term benefit of society. Projections, based on data, gave us a best guess on the risks associated on various levels of distancing, both to people's lives and the economy, so we decided as a society. And we now know that people can be infected, and be spreading to perhaps the more vulnerable, without showing symptoms themselves.

Concerned said "It is easy to make the case that the governments' response to the virus has caused greater harm than the virus itself, so I'm suprised you haven't considered it." Yes, easy to make the case. Harder to back it up right now, consider this again in a couple of years using hindsight and data.

Malcolm - the problem is people can form opinions based on no facts at all, so all you can do is hear their opinion, and try to see where it comes from. I would only change mine if they showed my new facts but many are holding opinions built on inaccuracies - such as this virus was deliberately created as a weapon, or it's not really that contagious, or we didn't really land on the moon. So, yes, pointless to even try to 'debate', there are not two sides, other than science and not-science.

Jim - glad you enjoyed the stories. And I agree, there are lots of possibilities in the current situation, although some friends have said they prefer NOT to read dystopian stories right now. But my focus could be dark or it could be uplifting, right? I like to pick some fairly normal characters, with needs and a plan, and then throw in a wrench - thwart a need, have them reassess things, maybe do a new plan, have it maybe work, maybe not, as character arcs are explored. Pretty standard, and how are own lives go. I like to make my characters relatable, and I always have to put in a twist. I'm thinking on this.

Yes - he is a disruptor. But not with positive results. Yes, if you believe all his claims in his SOTU speech, the US is a better place, thanks to him. I instead believe the many different fact-checkers that went through the speech line by line, referencing previous statements by Trump or his supporters, as well as facts and figures from solid sources, including US Government offices, and exposed his lies. I did not see a similar detailed assessment done by his media supporters, such as Fox News. They made no such assessment to support their benefactor, other than to brand other sources as being #FakeNews. But they don't really need to. Trump has set up the simplistic paradigm where he is the source of news, and everyone else is wrong. And he so far has been successful at it. The Democrats, with their reliance on their own old white guy, think that facts and a clean campaign (and their own billions of course) will win out in the end. I don't agree.

I think that is also the model for the Republicans, as well as may political parties around the world. Democracy is on the wane, replaced by government by the highest bidder, supported by the deep pockets of the 1%. I agree we need something different, but I can't see an alternative that stands a chance of replacing it.

Let's be specific here - I did a Google search for fact checking of Trump's SOTU, and got a list of sites. Two are: US News https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2020-02-08/ap-fact-check-trump-dems-and-the-state-of-disunion Washington Post - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/04/fact-checking-president-trumps-2020-state-union-address/ I watched his speech. These sources lay out a list of facts that contradict almost every claim he made - are they all wrong? What did they leave out that says I should not rely on them?

Sam - my initial point was that fact-checking of Trump consistently shows that he lacks integrity. He lies, repeatedly and frequently, which all the fact-checking sites show. Hence my view of him as the worst of the "FakeNews sites. But you seem to have more issues with the "truth" about WW2. All the events you cite did happen, as well as the very significant Russian involvement. After they had signed a pact with Germany, a pact that was broken. Coverage of all the war's events can vary of course, depending on the bias of the one documenting it, be it an author, politician, or historian. Here's a Wiki article with many links to follow up on. All part of the truth, as opposed to conspiracy theories, such as claims the events in Auschwitz did not happen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union_in_World_War_II