CORONAVIRUS PANIC WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE

[MadMojoMonkey]

Dogs are great.

That picture is on the "too big" side of things, just as a rule of thumb.

[Poopadoop]

Dogs are great.

I concur.

That picture is on the "too big" side of things, just as a rule of thumb.

[wufwugy]

I've heard them toss that out there as a justification. "Make a case" implies they have collected and presented evidence, which I would be grateful to be pointed towards. But since you ...

The Doctors Without Borders and Amnesty International cited cases for high sexual abuse rates are deeply flawed. It appears nobody knows how much bad behavior is really going on.

[Poopadoop]

The Doctors Without Borders and Amnesty International cited cases for high sexual abuse rates are deeply flawed. It appears nobody knows how much bad behavior is really going on.

By 'flawed' do you mean exaggerated? So DWB and AI are both saying the reports are lies?

And by 'nobody knows' well, yeah, nobody knows the exact truth about anything. But we can use some common sense rather than just accept what the gov't tells us, especially when it's clear what they're saying is both a) questionable on the face of it; and b) conveniently suits their purpose.

Finally, we can ask for evidence for arguments about child abuse being used to justify a different form of child abuse, and be suspicious when that evidence either isn't forthcoming or is disputed by disinterested third parties.

[wufwugy]

By 'flawed' do you mean exaggerated? So DWB and AI are both saying the reports are lies?

DWB and AI have conducted studies that found very high rates of sexual abuse. But those studies are very flawed. The Administration cited the DWB one. It appears to be a decent study but not comprehensive by any stretch of the imagination.

It seems we would need much more research to know what's going on.

[Poopadoop]

Not sure if you're still trying to defend Trump, or just obfuscating things.

https://www.doctorswithoutborders.or...entral-america

The numbers they cite are high, but relate to how many people fleeing other C. American countries and entering Mexico report being abused, not how many are themselves abusers. Presumably the abused are more likely to flee than the abusers. Just seems like common sense.

DWB criticize Trump et al. for citing their report in a misleading way as justifyig their behaviour at the border:

It is illogical to invoke a humanitarian crisis but not to offer a single humanitarian solution. Walls and punitive policies increase risks for an already vulnerable population, and will only make a regional crisis worse.

[Poopadoop]

It seems we would need much more research to know what's going on.

I wonder who would be in a position to carry out that research? They'd need to have access to, and the authority to interview, people caught illegally crossing the border. Hmm, who oh who would be able to do it?

And if someone were in a position to get to the bottom of things and come up with some hard facts, it would seem criminal to enact a policy of forced separation without first colllecting the appropriate data.

[wufwugy]

Not sure if you're still trying to defend Trump, or just obfuscating things.

Neither, man.

Trying to think clearly about it.

[wufwugy]

forced separation

Your idea that it would be better to question the children alone for a few minutes might be viable.

[Poopadoop]

Your idea that it would be better to question the children alone for a few minutes might be viable.

Thank you.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I thought Republicans were all about "family values."
I though Americans were all about "family values."

I am baffled that anyone can see a fence-walled structure with children, knowing those children will be there for days on end, and then spend mental effort thinking of reasons that is appropriate or even necessary.

EVEN IF the children need to be separated from their parents due to abuse, that is no justification to treat children like dogs.

[wufwugy]

EVEN IF the children need to be separated from their parents due to abuse, that is no justification to treat children like dogs.

You're totally right.

Do you know of a source that discusses the conditions and policy that doesn't have a track record of getting most things wrong?

[wufwugy]

Thank you.

No prob, dude.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Do you know of a source that discusses the conditions and policy that doesn't have a track record of getting most things wrong?

Not that I recall. It's been a while.

Not sure what you expect with that qualifier on the end.

[wufwugy]

For real.

[wufwugy]

I don't understand Virginia's shutdown until June 10th. Anybody have any ideas?

[MadMojoMonkey]

I don't understand Virginia's shutdown until June 10th. Anybody have any ideas?

If you haven't heard, there's a pandemic going on.
The death rates are already astounding. There are mass graves in Italy and Spain.

The US federal response is effectively nothing, and that means the pandemic is going to take longer to manage, and the math models that look realistic to me suggest we're looking at at least 50% of the population getting CV under the most optimistic models (that seem realistic to me).

Just to get a sense of some of the curves we're looking at, and the parameters that matter.




Keep in mind that those models that include adequate testing and quarantine facilities, equipment and staff, are not realistic models for our current situation.

That means that our primary tools to combat this are social distancing and personal hygiene.
Focus on those models and notice that getting a long-term exposure rate below 50% is pretty unlikely.

Notice how "flattening the curve" doesn't shorten the pandemic or lessen it... it lengthens the pandemic by slowing the spread so that healthcare facilities can not be so overwhelmed. We don't know how tall that red line has to go before the gray line represents more and more deaths due to the overloaded system - deaths that could have been recoveries - but we do know that if it gets too high... mass graves are the result.

Hospitals in the US are already having to order refrigerator trucks because they don't have room in their morgues for all the bodies.


June may be optimistic.

[boost]

If you haven't heard, there's a pandemic going on.
The death rates are already astounding. There are mass graves in Italy and Spain.

The US federal response is effectively nothing, and that means the pandemic is going to take longer to manage, and the math models that look realistic to me suggest we're looking at at least 50% of the population getting CV under the most optimistic models (that seem realistic to me).

Just to get a sense of some of the curves we're looking at, and the parameters that matter.




Keep in mind that those models that include adequate testing and quarantine facilities, equipment and staff, are not realistic models for our current situation.

That means that our primary tools to combat this are social distancing and personal hygiene.
Focus on those models and notice that getting a long-term exposure rate below 50% is pretty unlikely.

Notice how "flattening the curve" doesn't shorten the pandemic or lessen it... it lengthens the pandemic by slowing the spread so that healthcare facilities can not be so overwhelmed. We don't know how tall that red line has to go before the gray line represents more and more deaths due to the overloaded system - deaths that could have been recoveries - but we do know that if it gets too high... mass graves are the result.

Hospitals in the US are already having to order refrigerator trucks because they don't have room in their morgues for all the bodies.


June may be optimistic.

Yeah, I haven't seen a reasonable person explain how we're back to some sort of normalcy without a vaccine or effective antiviral treatment, and I haven't seen predictions for either of those landing in the next 3 months.

[Poopadoop]

They are talking about six months of shutdown here.

I guess Easter is off the table then.

[oskar]

I don't understand Virginia's shutdown until June 10th. Anybody have any ideas?

I don't understand why this isn't nationwide.
I think it comes down to me being incredibly ignorant when it comes to authoritarianism. It seems that there is a political capital to be gained by denying this is happening. Trump has underplayed this every step of the way from saying it's a hoax, to saying this will be over in the next "very short period of time", to saying the churches will be packed by easter. As a result the projection now is 100k deaths as the most positive outcome... but he hasn't lost politically because of it. On the contrary: he has gained popularity.
So to an astonishing number of people this is a strong look. This might go to the core of how authoritarianism works and why it is historically tends to be short-lived.

[CoccoBill]

Some things to ponder.

1. Herd immunity isn't an option
2. The only way to go back to normalcy is an effective vaccine or medication
3. Vaccine is probably a year away
4. When the vaccine is available, we still need to produce enough of it for 7 billion people, and vaccinate 7 billion people

There is likely no "normalcy" for 18-24 months.

Now imagine the possibility that there's never an effective vaccine.

[Poopadoop]

Germany has a plan to introduce mass testing (don't know how soon, but presumably before the thing would die out naturally, or mass vac. becomes a thing, otherwise there's no reason to have such a plan). The idea is something like you get a certificate if you test clean, and be allowed to go out as normal. Anyone caught out and about without a proper cert. will be in big scheisse.

I think this can work, or some variation of it: e.g., Everyone self-tests once/week. If you're +ive, stay inside and lock the doors; if you're -ive, go on about your life. You have some app you log onto to monitor tests/symptoms, and if you don't log in every week you get chased up on. I believe they have a similar thing re: symptoms in S. Korea.

[Poopadoop]

Here it is:

https://twitter.com/ProfKarolSikora/...66715251515395

Edit: By "test clean" I mean have antibodies.

[Poopadoop]

The US federal response is effectively nothing,

The UK is basically a shitshow too right now. You can't get tested unless you're sick enough to go to hospital.

The gov't keeps promising more tests but not delivering. Their latest claim (debunked) is that there's a shortage of chemicals to make the tests with. Uh, yeah, even if it were true, then maybe you could have thought of that 3 months ago? Meanwhile Germany is showing Europe how it's done, testing > 500k already (from what I've read).

[MadMojoMonkey]

Some things to ponder.

1. Herd immunity isn't an option
2. The only way to go back to normalcy is an effective vaccine or medication
3. Vaccine is probably a year away
4. When the vaccine is available, we still need to produce enough of it for 7 billion people, and vaccinate 7 billion people

There is likely no "normalcy" for 18-24 months.

Now imagine the possibility that there's never an effective vaccine.

There is currently no evidence which suggests you can catch CV more than once.

If that's true, then a vaccine is only valuable to people who have not yet been infected.

The other avenue to normalcy is when the disease has either infected 100% of the population or has been eradicated before reaching 100% of the population.
Note the latter is what "usually" happens with a new pandemic. One reason SARS was not this bad is because it presented symptoms early and was "easy" to quarantine infected people from the uninfected. Effective testing and quarantining is the number 1 best way to end a pandemic before it reaches 100% coverage.

[CoccoBill]

https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-catch-twice/

There is some immunity, we don't know how strong exactly, but estimates say not very strong. Probably lasting something like months. Most likely annual vaccinations are needed, just like with seasonal flu.

For herd immunity to kick in requires something like 60-80% to be immune. Letting that happen without effective medication will mean 10s of millions of casualties. I don't think that's a viable option. I think we're looking at months of quarantines, then gradual lifting of them until cases start to pile up again, and new quarantines are needed. Rinse and repeat until we find a proper fix, which looks to be quite a while away.

[CoccoBill]

On a positive note, the quarantines seem to be working well. The R0 of the virus is thought to be 2.2 without any measures, that is, one patient with an infection will infect 2.2 other people. The goal is to get that to 1.6 or lower. Here we've closed down schools, restaurants and most public spaces, everyone who can works remotely. Borders are closed and the capital area with the most infections has been segregated from the rest of the country. The data from the past week suggests, that with those measures our R0 is down to 1.0 or below. It may be possible to lift some of the restrictions before the summer and resume some normal functions, while still keeping the rate of infections at a measurable level. Maybe, hopefully.

[wufwugy]

Thank you for the responses on Virginia, guys. That it looks reasonable to you does change my opinion, because it tells me that reasonable people find it reasonable. This is important to me because when I see one state nearly doubling the length of expected shutdown, sirens go off. As we know, not shutting down long enough is a big mistake, and so would shutting down for too long.

[wufwugy]

They are talking about six months of shutdown here.

The crazy thing is that if this happened, it could possibly be that you could say goodbye to most people having jobs or being able to get jobs once the six months is up.

[CoccoBill]

You'd be a better judge of the economic repercussions, but it ain't gonna be pretty methinks.

[Poopadoop]

The crazy thing is that if this happened, it could possibly be that you could say goodbye to most people having jobs or being able to get jobs once the six months is up.

Yeah I doubt that.

Say someone works in a factory making aircraft parts for Boeing. They have no work now because there's no demand. If things go back to normal in six months, they'll have a job again the next day. So will travel agents, pilots, airport staff, etc. etc. etc. The jobs are not going to disappear forever.

[Poopadoop]

p.s. I had no idea the My Pillow guy was an expert on epidemiology. That's amazing!

[OngBonga]

Yeah I doubt that.

Say someone works in a factory making aircraft parts for Boeing. They have no work now because there's no demand. If things go back to normal in six months, they'll have a job again the next day. So will travel agents, pilots, airport staff, etc. etc. etc. The jobs are not going to disappear forever.

Some people will have jobs to walk back into, some won't. But this talk of "six months" is overblown. That's how long we can expect there to be restrictions, not a total lockdown. Those who have recovered should be allowed to go back to work if they can. Certain sectors of the economy, and regions free of the virus, will likely be back up and running before six months.

However long this goes on, jobs have already been lost forever. Some businesses will be able to just get back up and running, maybe even most if the financial support is there, but a Boeing employee is not the best example to give. How about all the independent businesses in your town? The hairdressers, the gift shop, the van hire company, the garden centre... some businesses will go bust, never to return. Those with huge revenue will be fine, they will either have the capital to ride this out, or will get the credit they need. Boeing will be fine, but Ludlow Garden Centre might not be.

[Poopadoop]

How about all the independent businesses in your town? The hairdressers, the gift shop, the van hire company, the garden centre... some businesses will go bust, never to return. Those with huge revenue will be fine, they will either have the capital to ride this out, or will get the credit they need. Boeing will be fine, but Ludlow Garden Centre might not be.

Err, do you think no-one will want a haircut after this is over? Or to hire a van, or buy a lawnmower?

Yes, these businesses will suffer, there's no doubt about it. But, as soon as the restrictions are lifted, the demand will be back, and probably stronger. And in the meantime, their overhead for the most part will be zero, unless they're paying rent. In that case, the gov't will likely have to step in.

But I seriously doubt that there's going to be mass unemployment after it's all over. It just won't happen.

[Poopadoop]

As a parallel, the Spanish Flu, which was much worse than this, had a much smaller economic impact than the world war which immediately preceded it. There was no worldwide economic collapse or mass unemployment.

[OngBonga]

Sure people will want a haircut. But will their usual hairdresser still be in business?

I think you're seriously underestimating the impact this will have. I hope you're right, and that everything will be all hunky dory by the end of the year. But this could fuck us for the entire decade.

This is different to Spanish flu. We basically just let that run rampant. There was no shutdown. Also, the population was much smaller, electricity was relatively new, it's a completely different world. We're trying to avoid a Spanish flu, basically arguing that a global recession is not as bad as tens of millions of deaths.

[Poopadoop]

Sure people will want a haircut. But will their usual hairdresser still be in business?

If they're not, what will that mean? New businesses will have to open to cope with the demand. That means jobs for all the hairdressers out there. The only people who won't need haircuts are the ones who die.

I think you're seriously underestimating the impact this will have. I hope you're right, and that everything will be all hunky dory by the end of the year. But this could fuck us for the entire decade.

Before this all started, experts predicted a 5% loss in GDP from a global pandemic. Just to put that in context, the projected loss from Brexit is around 2%. Both will hurt, but neither is the end of the world as we know it.

This is different to Spanish flu. We basically just let that run rampant. There was no shutdown. Also, the population was much smaller, electricity was relatively new, it's a completely different world. We're trying to avoid a Spanish flu, basically arguing that a global recession is not as bad as tens of millions of deaths.

People didn't really understand disease transmisson then. They didn't know the flu was a virus, for example. Had they known that, there certainly would have been a shutdown that would have saved a lot of lives. Most of the people who died were around the ages of 18 and 45. So it wasn't really comparable in that respect, you're correct.

[Poopadoop]

All of that said, the UK is currently doing possibly one of the worst jobs in the world at dealing with this thing right now. We've combined the half-assed approach to testing that has allowed the virus to run rampant in places like Italy and the US with the social distancing measures that are stifling the economy.

At least be consistent with your preferred strategy. Either test heavily AND do mitigation like Germany, S. Korea, and the like (preferred), or let it run rampant and go about business as usual, like Sweden and the Netherlands.

[Poopadoop]

On a more practical note, has anyone been following the mask/no-mask controversy?

The WHO told people not to wear masks - that they don't help. Presumably this was said to keep people from hoarding them away from medical personnel who obviously need them more. Others are saying even a homemade mask is better than nothing, and in a lot of asian countries, there's widespread mask-wearing. I'm thinking I may start wearing one made out of a hand towel when I go out.

[MadMojoMonkey]

https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-catch-twice/

There is some immunity, we don't know how strong exactly, but estimates say not very strong. Probably lasting something like months. Most likely annual vaccinations are needed, just like with seasonal flu.

For herd immunity to kick in requires something like 60-80% to be immune. Letting that happen without effective medication will mean 10s of millions of casualties. I don't think that's a viable option. I think we're looking at months of quarantines, then gradual lifting of them until cases start to pile up again, and new quarantines are needed. Rinse and repeat until we find a proper fix, which looks to be quite a while away.

The quotes from medical doctors in your link suggest these are due to false negatives from the test, which is only 30 - 50% accurate.


Fun fact: you are immune to every cold and flu you've ever caught. The only reason you can re-catch a cold or flu is because the virus itself has mutated to the point of no longer being recognized by your white blood cells as the thing they fought off already.

[MadMojoMonkey]

On a more practical note, has anyone been following the mask/no-mask controversy?

The WHO told people not to wear masks - that they don't help. Presumably this was said to keep people from hoarding them away from medical personnel who obviously need them more. Others are saying even a homemade mask is better than nothing, and in a lot of asian countries, there's widespread mask-wearing. I'm thinking I may start wearing one made out of a hand towel when I go out.

What I know about face masks:

1) They're not preventative. They're for keeping you from spreading an illness you know you have, not for keeping you from catching an illness. (see point 5 for clarification)

2) You exhale warm, moist air into them, which creates a breeding ground for the thing you're trying to control. As a result, a face mask needs to be regularly changed, such that you're never wearing a moist mask.

3) You should not re-use masks, as drying out is not going to kill most pathogens.

4) A mask that does not make a full seal against your face is not doing anything. If air can get to/from inside the mask to outside the mask without passing through the mask... then you may as well not be wearing a mask.
I.e. those paper masks which you hook around your ears are pointless.

5) medical professionals wear these paper masks to protect themselves from having someone who is known to be sick from actively sneezing or coughing into the medical worker's mouth, not to prevent airborne pathogens from being inhaled.

[CoccoBill]

The quotes from medical doctors in your link suggest these are due to false negatives from the test, which is only 30 - 50% accurate.

Very true, we just don't know yet. That's why I tossed it in as a possibility.

Fun fact: you are immune to every cold and flu you've ever caught. The only reason you can re-catch a cold or flu is because the virus itself has mutated to the point of no longer being recognized by your white blood cells as the thing they fought off already.

...except for specifically coronaviruses, where you typically don't get lasting immunity.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7782/

[CoccoBill]

As a parallel, the Spanish Flu, which was much worse than this, had a much smaller economic impact than the world war which immediately preceded it. There was no worldwide economic collapse or mass unemployment.

That's largely because that time we didn't know how to fight it and we didn't shut down the economy by lockdowns. Also the economy probably worked a bit differently back then too, with less speculative stock market actions causing companies to lose equity and be forced by shareholders to lay off people, for example.

[CoccoBill]

Re: masks. They help, and you should wear one, especially if you have symptoms and you're forced to interact with anyone. There's two types of masks:

1. Your sleeve, a scarf/bandana or those simple surgical masks - they do nothing to protect you, but they limit how much you transmit your germs onward. Wear one. Even if you use it incorrectly it's probably better than nothing, and won't put you in any extra risk, but you should learn how to use them (never touch the thing with your hands, don't reuse without disinfecting etc).
2. FFP2/FFP3 rated protective masks - they do the same as above, plus protect the user from the virus if used correctly. There's a world-wide shortage of these, and priority should be to make sure medical personnel, police etc have access to them. If you have one, great, but do not hoard them.

Or so I've heard.

[Poopadoop]

...except for specifically coronaviruses, where you typically don't get lasting immunity.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7782/

That is my understanding as well. The antibodies don't hang around forever like with most infections.

[MadMojoMonkey]

...except for specifically coronaviruses, where you typically don't get lasting immunity.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7782/

"The epidemiology of coronavirus colds has been little studied. Waves of infection pass through communities during the winter months, and often cause small outbreaks in families, schools, etc. (Fig. 60-2). Immunity does not persist, and subjects may be re-infected, sometimes within a year. The pattern thus differs from that of rhinovirus infections, which peak in the fall and spring and generally elicit long-lasting immunity. About one in five colds is due to coronaviruses."


Ah, shit!

[Poopadoop]

That's largely because that time we didn't know how to fight it and we didn't shut down the economy by lockdowns. Also the economy probably worked a bit differently back then too, with less speculative stock market actions causing companies to lose equity and be forced by shareholders to lay off people, for example.

Yeah I mean it's not really a good comparison. There were two peaks of fatalities from SF around age 18 and age 45. So these, coupled with the WW, contributed to a huge labour shortage that hurt the economy in a different way.

There is evidence, however, that people tended to self-distance during this, especially as it became clear that it was transmitted person-to-person.

[Poopadoop]

Your sleeve, a scarf/bandana or those simple surgical masks - they do nothing to protect you, but they limit how much you transmit your germs onward. Wear one. Even if you use it incorrectly it's probably better than nothing, and won't put you in any extra risk, but you should learn how to use them (never touch the thing with your hands, don't reuse without disinfecting etc).

Yeah I've heard they do protect you by filtering aerosols, trapping them in the fabric. Not sure what to believe, really.

Basically my Plan A right now is to treat everyone as a game of COVID russian roulette and stay the fuck away from them. Plan B is to start making my own masks. Plan C is to buy them when they become available.

Also, is it just me, or do other people get fucking annoyed inside when people don't make an effort to stay 2m away.

[Poopadoop]

Regarding immunity, your respiratory system, just like the rest of your body, is constantly housing different viruses, including rhinoviruses and corona-type viruses. We only get sick when conditions allow these to multiply out of control. It's perfectly possible to get low-grade CV-19, for example, and not be sick. So getting your rest, exercising, eating healthy foods, etc.., is a good way to protect yourself if you do get exposed (which of course you should try to avoid as much as possible).

[MadMojoMonkey]

Also, is it just me, or do other people get fucking annoyed inside when people don't make an effort to stay 2m away.

I've left the house 1 time in the past 3 weeks when I went to the grocery store the other day.

People were still in the "oh yeah, sorry" stage of social distancing. Like, we all know we're supposed to, but the habit hasn't really sunk in, yet. Even though little queues would form up near the milk and stuff, people would also walk past each other in the aisles, rather than stop and wait.

[Poopadoop]

Not-so-fun fact: My great-grandfather died of SF in 1918. He was a farmer in his early 40s and healthy at the time he caught it.

[CoccoBill]

I'm on day 20 of staying indoors, I think I've gone to the store twice and three times to pick up packages during that time, plus once a week to the gym in the building I live. Other than that I've stayed the hell away from everyone, and will probably continue for the foreseeable future. Haven't a mask myself either, would love to get some but they're not available anywhere.

[Poopadoop]

I've left the house 1 time in the past 3 weeks when I went to the grocery store the other day.

People were still in the "oh yeah, sorry" stage of social distancing. Like, we all know we're supposed to, but the habit hasn't really sunk in, yet. Even though little queues would form up near the milk and stuff, people would also walk past each other in the aisles, rather than stop and wait.

I haven't even tried to get groceries delivered here as I assume they're overwhelmed; maybe I'll try it though. I go for groceries once a week, and the efforts to stay 2m away are often pretty half-assed. Like you say, they will if it's convenient but if it means waiting more than a few seconds they just go on by. It's getting better as it goes on though.

I also take my dog to the (mostly empty) park a few times a week. The 'park' is actually my uni's campus, so just a few students around and easy to avoid people if you make an effort. Still, a couple of times I've been distracted, and turned around just in time for someone to walk right by me like in normal times. I mean, fuck dude, take a few extra steps and make a semi-circle ffs.

[OngBonga]

If they're not, what will that mean? New businesses will have to open to cope with the demand. That means jobs for all the hairdressers out there. The only people who won't need haircuts are the ones who die.

Sure, eventually there will be exactly as many hairdressers to meet demand. But this doesn't happen overnight. It might take years, since banks will mostly be lending to existing businesses that need finance to stay afloat. Starting a new business in the coming years just got a lot harder.

Before this all started, experts predicted a 5% loss in GDP from a global pandemic. Just to put that in context, the projected loss from Brexit is around 2%. Both will hurt, but neither is the end of the world as we know it.

What utter nonsense. These numbers are literally plucked out of someone's arse. We've already spent more than 5% of our GDP in rescue packages. We'll do well if this costs us less than 50% of our GDP.

Brexit is anyone's guess, and could end up being worth more in the long run. Well, that's a moot discussion now, as CV will utterly dominate economics for the foreseeable future, meaning we won't even know how much Brexit hurt or benefited us. All we can do now is see how the EU recovers compared to the UK.

All of that said, the UK is currently doing possibly one of the worst jobs in the world at dealing with this thing right now.

Whether this is true or not depends a great deal on ventilator capacity. If people start dying who would otherwise have been saved, then we've made critical mistakes. We're not there yet, at least I don't think we are. The daily figures are getting alarming though.

It's easy to critisise, but this is unprecedented. Nearly every government is making mistakes. Switzerland is being hit badly, a state that usually functions exceptionally. There may have been an underlying strategy involved, like the opposite of India where they had four hours notice. A progressive policy that controls panic might be the correct one. I'm glad it's not me that's making that call.

[Poopadoop]

Sure, eventually there will be exactly as many hairdressers to meet demand. But this doesn't happen overnight. It might take years, since banks will mostly be lending to existing businesses that need finance to stay afloat. Starting a new business in the coming years just got a lot harder.

Where do you get this idea? If anything, there will be an incentive to loan money; they've already reduced the lending rates to record lows.

What utter nonsense. These numbers are literally plucked out of someone's arse. We've already spent more than 5% of our GDP in rescue packages. We'll do well if this costs us less than 50% of our GDP.

Gov't spending does not = lost GDP.

[OngBonga]

Govt borrowing is fairly measured against GDP. We're not spending money we have in a pot. We're either borrowing it, or creating it out of thin air, which is basically borrowing it.

Where do you get this idea? If anything, there will be an incentive to loan money; they've already reduced the lending rates to record lows.

There will be high demand for loans. Banks can be choosy, they will hand out loans to those deemed lower risk. An existing business is lower risk than a new one.

[Poopadoop]

Govt borrowing is fairly measured against GDP. We're not spending money we have in a pot. We're either borrowing it, or creating it out of thin air, which is basically borrowing it.

I know it takes an effort, but at least try to understand the bare minimum of the concept that you're attempting to argue about.

The GDP is calculated by adding the sum of all consumer spending, government spending, business spending and total imports less total exports for the time period in question.

There will be high demand for loans. Banks can be choosy, they will hand out loans to those deemed lower risk. An existing business is lower risk than a new one.

Presumably someone in the gov't will have thought of this, and steps will be taken to encourage growth where needed.

[OngBonga]

The GDP is calculated by adding the sum of all consumer spending, government spending, business spending and total imports less total exports for the time period in question.

I'm not entirely sure where we're disagreeing.

Government spending includes borrowing. Maybe the figure of 5% you quote is reasonable, assuming it takes us ten years to recover. That's 5% a year for ten years, ie 50% of our GDP. We might just be looking at this from different angles.

Presumably someone in the gov't will have thought of this, and steps will be taken to encourage growth where needed.

Where did your faith in the government suddenly appear from? This is the Tories, they look out for banks and corporations first.

[Poopadoop]

Whether this is true or not depends a great deal on ventilator capacity. If people start dying who would otherwise have been saved, then we've made critical mistakes. We're not there yet, at least I don't think we are. The daily figures are getting alarming though.

It's easy to critisise, but this is unprecedented. Nearly every government is making mistakes. Switzerland is being hit badly, a state that usually functions exceptionally. There may have been an underlying strategy involved, like the opposite of India where they had four hours notice. A progressive policy that controls panic might be the correct one. I'm glad it's not me that's making that call.

To be clear, we're not the only country to fuck this up.

But, currently we are not even testing NHS workers on any reasonable level (i.e., before they get sick). That's a huge fail.

[OngBonga]

It's a huge fail if there's anything reasonable we could have done to be in a better position. Spain rejected a bunch of tests from China because they weren't reliable enough. No tests is better than bad tests.

idk why we're not testing as much as other places. It's a complex issue.

[wufwugy]

Sure people will want a haircut. But will their usual hairdresser still be in business?

This approximates a wise way of thinking about it.

An industry I work in, one of the core industries in the world, one that people would have a terrible time living without -- well, if we're shut down for 6 months, only a small fraction of firms would remain, prices for consumers would skyrocket, and quality of the goods would diminish terribly.

It would probably take multiple decades for the market to fully recover. The people who would be hurt the most would be the poor, and they would lose many billions, possibly trillions.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Kinda reminds me of that one time, 2 years ago, when Trump fired the US Pandemic Response Team to cut costs, saying, "If we need them back, we can hire them back quick."

Well, how's that going?

[Poopadoop]

An industry I work in, one of the core industries in the world, one that people would have a terrible time living without -- well, if we're shut down for 6 months, only a small fraction of firms would remain, prices for consumers would skyrocket, and quality of the goods would diminish terribly.

So, you're a hairdresser?

[wufwugy]

So, you're a hairdresser?

No

[Poopadoop]

No

What is the industry you work in?

[wufwugy]

What is the industry you work in?

Roofing specifically, construction contracting broadly.

[oskar]

Roofing

Is that what they call it now?

[MadMojoMonkey]

Construction is one of those 100% gonna bounce back quick industries, wuf.

Skilled construction workers take years to be truly safe and efficient, as you well know.
I was still learning every week after working in a carpentry shop for 2 years. The old guys have tricks for days and first they have to trust you and then they have to like you and then the need for conveying the trick has to come up in the workflow.

That kind of training takes years, and it doesn't go away.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Is that what they call it now?

[wufwugy]

Construction is one of those 100% gonna bounce back quick industries, wuf.

Skilled construction workers take years to be truly safe and efficient, as you well know.
I was still learning every week after working in a carpentry shop for 2 years. The old guys have tricks for days and first they have to trust you and then they have to like you and then the need for conveying the trick has to come up in the workflow.

That kind of training takes years, and it doesn't go away.

Very true.

We sell jobs because we're more trusted than the competition. We're trusted because of a long track record and references. 6 months of shutdown would put us, and most others, out of business. Even though many contractors would reenter the market later, the system would have reset in some integral ways that ultimately mean the consumer would pay more and get less.

[MadMojoMonkey]

My last point was pure speculation, to be fair. I should have made as much it clear in the post.
Oops.

At any rate, you're right. The jobs will return, but not all at once, and not equally for all jobs.

[wufwugy]

Along with knowing how many people die while having COVID-19 in their system, I would like to know how many more people are dying than were expected to die in a world that didn't have COVID-19. Would be cool to get more granular, like maybe adjusting for symptom types.

Without getting more granular, when it comes to all cause mortality, the number might be negative for the time being since so many people aren't dying in car accidents.

[Poopadoop]

Not sure if this belongs in the MAGA thread or here, so whatever:

https://twitter.com/HoarseWisperer/s...57025198489600

I love how they're all looking at him like he's an asshole 'cause he's not getting behind Trump's unproven miracle fantasy cure.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Yep. And now Fauci requires a security detail because Trump supporters are sending him death threats for disagreeing with the President.

Dafuq is wrong with people?

[OngBonga]

Without getting more granular, when it comes to all cause mortality, the number might be negative for the time being since so many people aren't dying in car accidents.

This occurred to me recently, so I googled how many people die on UK roads, and the average is 5 per day. We're up to 500+ a day thanks to CV.