OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19): Part V

[Machinehead]

I’m not sure it’s planned, per se. But the field is certainly tilted.

Think about it, though. We existed without money for tens of thousands of years. It's nothing more than a concept.

It's very easy to manipulate and, if you have political power, arbitrarily dictate what worth is.

 

[Ola]

This is what I don’t get. Sure, the elderly population has the highest risk for serious consequences here, but that doesn’t make it low risk for younger people. It’s still high risk, just not as high.

Also, regarding car crashes, cancer, etc etc. We are CONSTANTLY trying to find ways to reduce the deadliness of those things. We find out what works based on what the data and the experts in that data tell us, and we implement those things. It’s why we have mandatory seatbelt laws. It’s why we have airbags. It’s why cars are designed to crumple on impact to better protect the interior cabin. If they find ways to make car travel even safer, they’d implement that too. So why object to the things the experts in this field say are necessary?

Btw, after however many years of conflict on this board, I’m thoroughly enjoying @Machinehead posts I wholeheartedly agree with.

And @Machinehead: Great stuff guys!

I want to add one thing though. Government constantly face these decisions. Its accuracy can be debated, but it need some kind of basis for their decision and hence they look at what the Value of preventing fatility (VPF) are for different alternatives. In the traffic, all kinds of actions can be done to increase safety and its of course very favorable field to follow up measures and with god accuracy predict what effects they get.

The current VPF in the US is 7-8m USD. The GDP in the US is $21,427,100,000,000. An restrictive measure that shaves only 1% of the US GDP will in other words cost $214,271,000,000, and diveded by by 8m gives you that resources that could have saved 26k lives just went up in the air.

US economy sank 4.8 percent Q1 2020. Naturally, only about half of that quarter was really affected by Covid-19, 40m Americans have since lost their jobs etc. The annualized GDP hit is expected to be around 10% to 50%, but I think the high number is based on a lockdown continuing (How the American economy can recover from the coronavirus pandemic).

With this, we are not even looking at the economy from a balance sheet perspective. The economy is supported by the government loaning money and pushing it into the system (The government budget deficit is about to explode to fight the coronavirus). The national debt is exploding. The result is that there will not be much dry powder to stimulate the economy when we get out from it and the following decades.

Unemployment is up by 40m people. With what we know about mental health, unemployed people losing their health care, and what not, this is of course a tremendous tradgedy on all levels.

All in all, no matter how you count, the shut down costing millions of lives in the US, right? 10% of GDP up in the air. A national debt that wasn't good and exploded from a non-optimal level, that will have to be paid back by coming generations. 40m lost jobs and counting.

Reading just about everything that can be ready of this thing, I think it is pure nonsense to criticize anyone for not wiping Covid 19 away before it spread. Its like an earthquake. A virus as infectious as this -- as soon as it spreads you are screwed. If anyone had a time machine they could have gone back to 31 December and tried to shut down the entire world, but really, nobody would have had the mandate to do so.

The most costly call that I think everyone would want back is the shut-down because it came at a tremendous cost and its hard to tell if it has had any positive impact (in simple English, we are sheltering in place, not being forced to not leave an apartment with the risk of having your front door welded shut if you didn't obey like in China, and this has proven to not stop the spread). Now it is hard to reopen again, but tremendous costs are on the line and it should be done ASAP.

Its a tradgedy and many lives will be lost no matter what. But its time to face the harsh reality.

 

[egelband]

Think about it, though. We existed without money for tens of thousands of years. It's nothing more than a concept.

It's very easy to manipulate and, if you have political power, arbitrarily dictate what worth is.

I agree. But I think it’s more opportunistic than orchestrated.

 

[Ola]

Think about it, though. We existed without money for tens of thousands of years. It's nothing more than a concept.

It's very easy to manipulate and, if you have political power, arbitrarily dictate what worth is.

100% true.

But there is also a reason for why no presidential candidate ever have promised to write a check of 1m to all citizens if he wins.

In today's economy all countries depend on each other. Going the North Korea route would crash any economy. The second you start to think about doing more yourself, you will become less competitive and crash.

So to be able to trade with each other we must respect each other's currencies. Everyone can print money. When you start to do that, this respect goes out the window fast. Instead this is funded by loans and raised national debt that will have to be paid of by coming generations.

 

[eco's bones]

I am not quite sure what you mean, you lost me somewhere there.

I think it’s quite clear that shutting down was a big blunder — in light of what we know today — and that all focus/resources should have been put at protecting those at risk, which would have had a real impact.

Now they need to steer the policy towards what will work and from a policy that certainly makes much more damage than whatever — if any — gains you get. That can’t be done over night.

I think what is clear now is that this virus had a two month head start on whatever anyone might call a health authority here in the United States. In a densely populated area like NYC with hundreds of planes flying into JFK, Laguardia and Newark every day. The virus had already spread through a significant % of the population before the medical authorities knew what had hit them and meanwhile the federal response until the second week of March was that it was not to worry, no big deal--just more fake news.

.....and as far as shutting down. How do you not shut down when you're hospital system is way past capacity and nurses, doctors, first responders are joining the sick? I don't know how things really went in your country but this is what was happening here. The situation was pretty much already out of control by the time the first people were going through the hospital doors.

So the shutdown was absolutely necessary. It helped stop the spread--helped our medicos to eventually get us to a maintainable situation. But it's also spread to other states and will continue to do so. And really what we have had and still have is 50 governors and a president who are for the most part not even on the same page and that comes really down to the lack of leadership we have on the federal level--Donald has basically told the governors make up their own minds while at the same time pressuring those minds in the direction he wants them to go which isn't based on data or any real medical knowledge. It's not been the federal govt. responding to the crisis--it's been the states responding and the federal govt. following however reluctantly.

 

[Ola]

I think what is clear now is that this virus had a two month head start on whatever anyone might call a health authority here in the United States. In a densely populated area like NYC with hundreds of planes flying into JFK, Laguardia and Newark every day. The virus had already spread through a significant % of the population before the medical authorities knew what had hit them and meanwhile the federal response until the second week of March was that it was not to worry, no big deal--just more fake news.

.....and as far as shutting down. How do you not shut down when you're hospital system is way past capacity and nurses, doctors, first responders are joining the sick? I don't know how things really went in your country but this is what was happening here. The situation was pretty much already out of control by the time the first people were going through the hospital doors.

So the shutdown was absolutely necessary. It helped stop the spread--helped our medicos to eventually get us to a maintainable situation. But it's also spread to other states and will continue to do so. And really what we have had and still have is 50 governors and a president who are for the most part not even on the same page and that comes really down to the lack of leadership we have on the federal level--Donald has basically told the governors make up their own minds while at the same time pressuring those minds in the direction he wants them to go which isn't based on data or any real medical knowledge. It's not been the federal govt. responding to the crisis--it's been the states responding and the federal govt. following however reluctantly.

Yeah, I am not saying that the decision to shutdown was a mistake, in light of the information available at the time it was taken. And certainly not in NYC no matter what. The decision to shut down in NYC was probably correct.

But in hindsight it seems very obvious that the cost for the cure (the shut down) will cost more than the benefit in the vast majority of places. First of all, the shut down has not had a bit effect on spreading the virus as far as can be told. People take it home and spread it more within the family. Many sectors cannot be shut down (care of elders is a perfect example), so they become hubs for spreading the virus. People in those sectors get sick and take it home. Its not an absolute quarantine, people go to the store and what not and pass it around. The shut down was also based on a model based on input data, like mortality rate, that was just widely incorrect.

In short, the picture that is becoming clear now is that (1) our actions must be durable, there is zero point in taking the best actions in the world for 6 months and then end up in a situation where you for the following 6-12 months must, for example, open up. (2) You must find ways to protect the elders. You cannot keep the virus from spreading in the general population, even with a lockdown. And if it spreads in the general population it will get into homes for elders unless changes are made. The absolute focus must be to get instant testing on those who goes in and out of homes for elders and the protective equipment they need, as well as education. If the workers at these places has language issues, no education etc, they will not implement whatever guidelines they get. (3) So many elders does not live in special homes. They must quarentine and get help to do it. Shopping etc.

People under 50 y/o does not face an increasing risk to die from Covid-19 compared to the normal flu, if anything the risk of dying from Covid-19 is smaller for people under 50 y/o that are not in a risk group.

Yet, when reports comes out from homes for elders anywhere, they are the same. Its horrible. A few measures has been taken, but definitely not anything significant. Testing is available, but they aren't getting it to the extent they need. And so forth.

 

[Inferno]

New drinking game...

Everytime ola makes a post with more than 2 paragraphs take a shot.

For every paragraph beyond 2 take an extra shot.

Have poison control on standby.

 

[Synergy27]

I agree. But I think it’s more opportunistic than orchestrated.

I think it started out as opportunistic, but it’s now orchestrated, or at least structured in such a way that those who have already reaped the benefits will continue to reap them.

The DNC and the RNC are largely the same from a tangible policy perspective. They take money from the the rich, and keep the laws the same so that their donors can continue to make money. They then take opposite stances on social issues that people are passionate about, but in reality don’t really impact day to day life, and sit back and laugh as we continue to allow ourselves to be pillaged as we rant at each other online.

Then they push these bailouts and probably sit there thinking “holy shit, I can’t believe they are letting us get away with this.”

 

[Chaels Arms]

Nothing definite but sounds like Cuomo might be letting the Pause order expire on May 15th and letting regional governments make their own decisions on reopening provided they meet the guidelines laid down.

They posted a chart showing where each region stands on the different criteria for the guidelines but of course it was completely unreadable on TV. From what I could tell none of the regions were clear for every criteria but there were a few that only had one stat in the "red." NYC had three in the red I believe. Is there anywhere we can view the presentation Cuomo put on?

 

[Chaels Arms]

So the chart I mentioned is actually on Cuomo's twitter if anyone wants to take a look. NYC is actually fairly close in terms of share of total beds available (need 30%, NYC is currently at 26%) and share of ICU beds available (need 30%, NYC is currently at 21%) but still has a long way to go in terms of new hospitalizations (must be under 2 per 100k residents for a 3 day rolling average, NYC is currently at 5.41%).

 

[ponytrekker]

EXACTLY!

Just like I'm not saying ban cars or swimming pools, I've actually been pro-reopening this entire time, even though I hate the term "reopening" simply because it isn't black and white.

But we do absolutely everything we can to make these other activities safer, you're 100% correct about that, so why wouldn't we do the same here?

Again, not saying ban cars, but opening schools tomorrow would be like getting on the highway drunk and blindfolded.

I thought of responding to the Anti-mask groups with "sEEt bULt lawes aR a LibEREl pl0T tO ruiN tHA Connomie"

 

[Boris Zubov]

New drinking game...

Everytime ola makes a post with more than 2 paragraphs take a shot.

For every paragraph beyond 2 take an extra shot.

Have poison control on standby.

The IGNORE function is your friend.

 

[Ola]

English for, it failed.

"“While mitigation didn’t fail, I think it’s fair to say that it didn’t work as well as we expected,” Scott Gottlieb, Mr. Trump’s former commissioner of food and drugs, said Sunday on the CBS program Face the Nation. “We expected that we would start seeing more significant declines in new cases and deaths around the nation at this point. And we’re just not seeing that.”"

 

[Leonardo87]

Nothing definite but sounds like Cuomo might be letting the Pause order expire on May 15th and letting regional governments make their own decisions on reopening provided they meet the guidelines laid down.

They posted a chart showing where each region stands on the different criteria for the guidelines but of course it was completely unreadable on TV. From what I could tell none of the regions were clear for every criteria but there were a few that only had one stat in the "red." NYC had three in the red I believe. Is there anywhere we can view the presentation Cuomo put on?

This one..

 

[Tawnos]

English for, it failed.

"“While mitigation didn’t fail, I think it’s fair to say that it didn’t work as well as we expected,” Scott Gottlieb, Mr. Trump’s former commissioner of food and drugs, said Sunday on the CBS program Face the Nation. “We expected that we would start seeing more significant declines in new cases and deaths around the nation at this point. And we’re just not seeing that.”"

You could look at it that way, or you could look at it as them having underestimated the scale of this in the first place.

Basically, they've been wrong about this twice now.

 

[Irishguy42]

or you could look at it as them having underestimated the scale of this in the first place.

I think this is the more believable reality.

 

[Tawnos]

I think this is the more believable reality.

And to be fair, Gottlieb is one of those early administration hires who was at least qualified to hold his position. He hasn't been FDA commissioner for a year, at this point, so I'm not entirely sure who the "we" he refers to there is.

 

[Ola]

I think this is the more believable reality.

You could look at it that way, or you could look at it as them having underestimated the scale of this in the first place.

Basically, they've been wrong about this twice now.

I get what you guys mean, but from one perspective it failed heavily. Here is why.

The measures taken has clearly not been about flattening the curve under the health care capacity. Like we have not seen anyone ‘turning on the tap’ when being way below capacity etc., like Sweden have done. So the strategy has aimed higher and tried to implement measures to contain the virus. Get it down towards zero. That failed.

Hence in many stages you will just drag it out for a longer time at a much higher cost than necessary.

As it is now, many states will have to start to open up — because they have nothing less in the tank — when they in fact should do the opposite, and maybe shut down because it’s not because until now they are starting to have big problems.

It’s not a sprint, it’s a marathon. 3/4 are left, The full country wide shut down wasn’t made at the pace you should start the first 1/4 of a marathon.

JMHO.

 

[Tawnos]

I get what you guys mean, but from one perspective it failed heavily. Here is why.

The measures taken has clearly not been about flattening the curve under the health care capacity. Like we have not seen anyone ‘turning on the tap’ when being way below capacity etc., like Sweden have done. So the strategy has aimed higher and tried to implement measures to contain the virus. Get it down towards zero. That failed.

Hence in many stages you will just drag it out for a longer time at a much higher cost than necessary.

As it is now, many states will have to start to open up — because they have nothing less in the tank — when they in fact should do the opposite, and maybe shut down because it’s not because until now they are starting to have big problems.

It’s not a sprint, it’s a marathon. 3/4 are left, The full country wide shut down wasn’t made at the pace you should start the first 1/4 of a marathon.

JMHO.

So, in other words, it’s a failure only if you ignore everything *everyone* involved has stated the goal of the lockdowns has been, from all corners and all parties, and instead judge it based on a perception of a different goal.

Got it.

 

[eco's bones]

Nothing definite but sounds like Cuomo might be letting the Pause order expire on May 15th and letting regional governments make their own decisions on reopening provided they meet the guidelines laid down.

They posted a chart showing where each region stands on the different criteria for the guidelines but of course it was completely unreadable on TV. From what I could tell none of the regions were clear for every criteria but there were a few that only had one stat in the "red." NYC had three in the red I believe. Is there anywhere we can view the presentation Cuomo put on?

Even with that we can forget going to gyms or the movies or eating in restaurants for a while and it will still be advisable to keep distance and wear a mask when other people than those in your household are near. The issue likely to turn into 'oh, it's all over I can throw the mask away'--no, it's going to be more like a slow and gradual return to things. My wife gave me a haircut a few days ago--did pretty well actually. There's no point in me going out of my way to the barbershop to spend my $12 (I know that's pretty cheap) until this is all over.

 

[Ola]

So, in other words, it’s a failure only if you ignore everything *everyone* involved has stated the goal of the lockdowns has been, from all corners and all parties, and instead judge it based on a perception of a different goal.

Got it.

I am not sure I follow. If the goal is to flatten the curve so that it gets below health care capacity — why has the same restrictions been imposed at places that’s are not even close to utilizing full health care capacity?

Like Gottlib said — the aim was very obviously to reduce the infection rate so that it could be controlled by contact tracing. Which failed.

Also, if the strategy is to flatten the curve — how can it be a success if the curve is way below health care capacity at many places during a full scale country wide lockdown??

 

[The Crypto Guy]

This one..
View attachment 344918

Shocking Westchester is being lumped in with Hudson Valley (even though it is, figured we have our own region). Southern westchester is much worse than those north in the region.

 

[Leonardo87]

Shocking Westchester is being lumped in with Hudson Valley (even though it is, figured we have our own region). Southern westchester is much worse than those north in the region.

My office is in southern westchester but I live in Rockland. So I kinda hope both get opened up together. NYC and the boroughs are going to be last to open sadly.

 

[ponytrekker]

I get what you guys mean, but from one perspective it failed heavily. Here is why.

The measures taken has clearly not been about flattening the curve under the health care capacity. Like we have not seen anyone ‘turning on the tap’ when being way below capacity etc., like Sweden have done. So the strategy has aimed higher and tried to implement measures to contain the virus. Get it down towards zero. That failed.

Hence in many stages you will just drag it out for a longer time at a much higher cost than necessary.

As it is now, many states will have to start to open up — because they have nothing less in the tank — when they in fact should do the opposite, and maybe shut down because it’s not because until now they are starting to have big problems.

It’s not a sprint, it’s a marathon. 3/4 are left, The full country wide shut down wasn’t made at the pace you should start the first 1/4 of a marathon.

JMHO.

Sweden's model is not exactly stellar.

 

[Tawnos]

I am not sure I follow. If the goal is to flatten the curve so that it gets below health care capacity — why has the same restrictions been imposed at places that’s are not even close to utilizing full health care capacity?

Like Gottlib said — the aim was very obviously to reduce the infection rate so that it could be controlled by contact tracing. Which failed.

Also, if the strategy is to flatten the curve — how can it be a success if the curve is way below health care capacity at many places during a full scale country wide lockdown??

You keep things under capacity so, in the event of a spike, you still have enough. It’s a spike putting you over capacity that would be catastrophic.

Gottlieb and others were hoping that we would already be at the point where the numbers would start decreasing. There are a few reasons why that hasn’t happened. One is that, like I said, they underestimated this. We’re still on the up part of the curve, even if that curve is much flatter than it could’ve been. Another is the uneven response around the country. Some places are past the peak, at least the first one, but many others aren’t. There are a couple of other reasons as well.