It sure was disheartening to wake up on May 20 and find out all the sacrifice, lost jobs and lost businesses have been for next to nothing after reading "Virus pipeline to elder care" (front page). It absolutely blows my mind that our governor did something as idiotic as putting COVID-positive elderly people back into nursing homes. Although his constant rhetoric would indicate differently, our hospitals haven't come close to being overrun. In fact, most of them were never even half full. So why put infected people next to our most vulnerable? It's like putting a fox in a hen house and something any intelligent plan would look to avoid.
Dare I say that if President Donald Trump had done anything this foolish, people would be losing their minds. Roughly 80%, actually higher according to most studies, of our population has very little to fear from the virus, yet we quarantine them only to seed a nursing home with the virus. Nice plan! It's no wonder why Minnesota has the highest percentage of long-term care deaths among its totals in the entire country, as Gov. Tim Walz apparently doesn't value them.
Florida has a much higher elderly population and a fraction of the deaths per capita we have, but it actually had a plan to keep them safe. Instead of making up for his mistakes by punishing everyone else with overreaching restrictions, maybe Walz can actually protect those who need it.
Jeff Schneider, Otsego
• • •
I can't stand it anymore! Why do we continue to use the number of COVID-19 deaths (actual and probable) as a meaningful metric when the vast majority (28 out of 32 deaths on May 21) occur in closed-space environments such as nursing homes? How can this possibly reflect the progression of the virus in the general public as well as changes that may result from opening things up? And while we're at it, why not remove the moniker of "probable" to nursing home deaths by testing post-mortem to verify the diagnosis to keep the data clean?
Jim Halvorsen, Red Wing, Minn.
REOPENING GYMS
Once again, Goliath crushes David
The governor's recent decision to not allow gyms to open in the near term will cause dozens if not hundreds of small gyms to close permanently. Given their cost structure, the large national chains would probably prefer that gyms remain closed until more than 50% capacity is allowed. However, small gyms can continue to make the lease payments even with more restrictive capacity levels.
Small class-based gyms in particular should be allowed to open with attendance restrictions. A class-based workout ensures much more predictable traffic flows and is much easier to control movement and maintain safety than an open, machine-based gym. I was most disappointed to hear that 50 people can gather on a patio to drink beer, but healthy individuals cannot workout in a gym with much greater distance and safety protocols in place. Of course, as with retail stores, the eventual winners in this will be the large national gym chains.
Dennis Nisler, Shoreview
STATE RAISES
You want us to pay for this?
So the guy who works for the state doing budgets says we can't change the fact that state employees will get their raises? Wow, big surprise there. ("State to honor raises in contracts," May 21.) I guess everyone else who is losing their jobs and businesses can pay for it.
R. Arens, West Lakeland
• • •
Let me be sure I get this right. The Minnesota GOP wants to dishonor a government promise to middle-class workers by reneging a labor agreement so that it can lower the deficit so, eventually, it can give tax cuts to upper-class Minnesotans. Have I got that right?