BBC: China pneumonia outbreak: COVID-19 Global Pandemic

[twa]

I wonder how strictly they will enforce the actively seeking a job bit on collecting unemployment?

 

probably best to shift the labor and bailout issues to another thread

[Cooked Crack]

 

 

 

 

[The 12th Commandment]

51 minutes ago, twa said:

 

are these examples of confirmation bias?

 

modeling and making projections is fun.......believe which experts about what?

Medicine is a science, economics is an art.

[twa]

Just now, KAOSkins said:

Medicine is a science, economics is an art.

 

what is pandemic modeling?

[The 12th Commandment]

Just now, twa said:

 

what is pandemic modeling?

Over my pay grade.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

26 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

All oil production is unsustainable.  It's a finite resource.  

 

However, all of the oil that was in the ground, right now?  It'll be there a year from now, too.  (Unless we sell it, now.)  

 

yeah, but the companies who extract the oil (and the jobs) might not be.

 

 

Some in the job losses will be permanent.  Not many economists think the economy is going to do a v-recovery. Especially if commercial tenents start defaulting on mortgages causing banks to accumulate bad debt. The v shaped/fast recover is a pipe dream just as much as “the virus will be over in a week” was a pipe dream...

 

26 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Edited March 26, 2020 by CousinsCowgirl84

[Destino]

27 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

All oil production is unsustainable.  It's a finite resource.  

 

However, all of the oil that was in the ground, right now?  It'll be there a year from now, too.  (Unless we sell it, now.)  

 

Didn’t they figure out how to make biodiesel from algae a while ago?  It’s too expensive to compete with traditional methods of oil production, but it would seem to solve the “finite resource” problem,  

[twa]

Just now, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

yeah, but the companies who extract the oil (and the jobs) might not be.

 

they get unemployment and tax writeoffs, besides bankruptcy options

 

the issue of states and feds losing tax base is going to hurt since it helped thru the last recession.....those high taxes on gasoline are sure gonna lose production in places

[CousinsCowgirl84]

32 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

 

There are policies you can enact to make sure that people losing jobs right now are able to stay on their feet (like the bill passed last night). Because this isn't driven by any underlying issues in the economy itself,

 

 

the longer this goes on, the greater the chances that short term issues become underlying issues.

 

32 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

There is no healthy economy as long as a virus that has no anti-virals or vaccines working against it is circulating freely in the public.

I know, but a girl can dream can’t she...

[twa]

3 minutes ago, Destino said:

Didn’t they figure out how to make biodiesel from algae a while ago?  It’s too expensive to compete with traditional methods of oil production, but it would seem to solve the “finite resource” problem,  

 

they also figured out oil and NG are renewables 

[Larry]

14 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

yeah, but the companies who extract the oil (and the jobs) might not be.

 

Yeah, the oil industry is going to cease to exist.  (Unless we immediately start ignoring the people who are dropping dead, as a necessary price for all of us to pay, to save the lives of those corporations.)  

[Dan T.]

1 minute ago, Larry said:

 

Yeah, the oil industry is going to cease to exist.  (Unless we immediately start ignoring the people who are dropping dead, as a necessary price for all of us to pay, to save the lives of those corporations.)  

 

Hey, corporations are people my friend.

[Larry]

9 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

the longer this goes on, the greater the chances that short term issues become underlying issues.

 

The disease kills more people if there's underlying issues.  

 

But more importantly (and less "play on words"-ish.)  

 

We have options for reducing the economic impact of fighting the disease.  For example, that $1200 payoff that's coming Real Soon Now?  It should have been $1200 a month, from the start.  

 

Other countries have taken some of those steps.  Here, we can't even discuss the option unless there's a corporate slush fund attached to it.  

[tshile]

1 hour ago, No Excuses said:

Also the whole point of this lockdown is so we can get through the first wave of case spikes and be prepared to dampen a very likely second wave. But to do that we really need the whole country to be testing and tracing by the end of May. Otherwise, this a never ending cycle until a vaccine is found and distributed which is a long way off.

 

All the data shows that testing is ramping up in some parts of the country but many others are still lagging behind.

this crisis shows everyone’s true colors. 
 

the selfish assholes are exposed

the idiots are exposed

 

when this ends I’m sure people will use hindsight to justify things. 
 

but the reality is you’re judged by how you respond in the moment given the best data available at the moment 

 

some people can surprise you. Others it’s just confirmation of what you always thought but maybe weren’t quite sure. 

[The 12th Commandment]

17 minutes ago, twa said:

 

they get unemployment and tax writeoffs, besides bankruptcy options

 

the issue of states and feds losing tax base is going to hurt since it helped thru the last recession.....those high taxes on gasoline are sure gonna lose production in places

Despite being a blue state, NM gets the lion's share of our revenue from the Permian Basin.  This is going to put a major hurting on us.  Fingers crossed for my pension.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

@Larry not disagreeing that we could have done more regarding the economy.

 

It just seems strange that 500 (in NY) additional people dying is enough to overflow our morgues, and that 60,000 people getting moderately sick is enough to bring our healthcare system to its knees, especially when you compare it to the number of people who routinely get sick.

 

maybe I overestimate how civilized we really are.

Edited March 26, 2020 by CousinsCowgirl84

[The 12th Commandment]

1 minute ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

It just seems strange that 500 additional people dying is enough to overflow our morgues, and that 60,000 people getting moderately sick is enough to bring our healthcare system to its knees, especially when you compare it to the number of people who routinely get sick.

 

maybe I overestimate how civilized we really are.

Wide spread anecdotal reports that the number of deaths are being vastly under reported.  It'll out eventually.

[PeterMP]

1 hour ago, No Excuses said:

 Otherwise, this a never ending cycle until a vaccine is found and distributed which is a long way off.

 

This is only true if the disease mutates to evade our immune system, while staying as lethal and/or as contagious or the immune system poorly remembers this disease and it is possible to be re-infected again.

 

By the time H1N1 vaccine was created, the spread of the virus has dropped dramatically.  About 20% of the population ended up getting H1N1 before the vaccine and people over 60 seemed to have some built in immunity so figure about 45% of the US public had gotten something that made them immune to H1N1 at some time and that was able to dramatically decrease its ability to spread.

 

(The normal seasonal flu shows similar values, but is a little more complex because there is generally more than one "flu" and the vaccine has different levels of effectiveness against it.  But about 50% of the US population gets vaccinated and another 6% get a "flu", but that combination normally gives us a communal protection that at least limits the spread and causes it to die out.)

 

It seems reasonable without mutations to evade the human immune system, the same sort numbers will prevent the mass spread of it here.

 

Maybe this will mutate and turn into a seasonal flu situation, but it might not.

 

(I'll also point out that there will be an evolutionary component to it that people that are more likely to be exposed will be more likely to get it so as time passes you'll have people that don't have that are just less likely to be exposed.)

Edited March 26, 2020 by PeterMP

[Larry]

5 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

@Larry not disagreeing that we could have done more regarding the economy.

 

But we didn't, so ignore them people who are dying, and get your lazy behinds back to work.  Right?  

 

 

You see, that's what you're continuing to advocate, with your use of the past tense, to try to push your monstrously inhuman position that gee, thousands of dead people is just the price that some people are going to have to pay, because of vague statements about nebulous effects on "the economy".  

 

5 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

It just seems strange that 500 (in NY) additional people dying is enough to overflow our morgues, and that 60,000 people getting moderately sick is enough to bring our healthcare system to its knees, especially when you compare it to the number of people who routinely get sick.

 

maybe I overestimate how civilized we really are.

 

Perhaps you should consider dropping your work for Satan, before trying to convince us with how concerned your are about other people's lack of civilization.  

 

[Hersh]

It’s clear that a lot of people won’t understand that be taking the actions we are taking now, a couple of million lives at least are being saved. How many alone in NYC would die if we just went about daily life? A certain segment of the population will never accept that as reality. 

[StillUnknown]

 

[PeterMP]

14 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

@Larry not disagreeing that we could have done more regarding the economy.

 

It just seems strange that 500 (in NY) additional people dying is enough to overflow our morgues, and that 60,000 people getting moderately sick is enough to bring our healthcare system to its knees, especially when you compare it to the number of people who routinely get sick.

 

maybe I overestimate how civilized we really are.

 

About 155 people die in NYC in day normally.  They had 88 people die of Covid-19 in one day.  There aren't many systems in this country that can take on that sort of overload in a short time.  NYC isn't building capacity to have a 50% increase in the number of people dying in a day.  To have that type of extra capacity would be considered a waste of tax payer money.

 

(And not just in terms of space, but in terms of work force.  Think about if the government regularly had enough people to be prepared for a 50% increase in every ability just in case.  The NYC morgue doesn't pay 50% more people than it needs to on a day-to-day basis.  Only the US military works with those types of margins.)

[88Comrade2000]

 

Hmm.  The audio fades in and out, don't know why. Well, I got it from Facebook; it you want to hear the whole thing.

 

Edited March 26, 2020 by Rdskns2000

[Corcaigh]

AND ... this thing may be just getting started. How many additional deaths in a SINGLE DAY should NY be able to handle in order to be considered civilized. 100, 500, 1000? Once the medical systems are sufficiently stressed it's likely that the death rates will increased significantly.

 

Sure we need to find a place where economic activity will be balanced with public health, but let's at least flatten the ****ing curve first.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

42 minutes ago, Larry said:

that's what you're continuing to advocate, with your use of the past tense, to try to push your monstrously inhuman position that gee, thousands of dead people is just the price that some people are going to have to pay, 

 

 

No, I want to save as many people as we can. If it makes a difference.  A few studies say it will, the last UK study said it won’t (everyone is already infected but they don’t know it). But, you don’t agree we already make that sort of sacrifice?

We already know the virus is going to be bad for some people, and we are currently attempting to  mitigating it’s effects. We are there already. 

 
Im defiantly not taking a hardline on opening up the economy or not. I’m trying to figure out where the acceptable trade off is. Zero is not realistic. 
 

The thing is that it’s hard to see the virus, the impact of closing the economy up on the virus, ect. It’s easy to see the effects on the economy.
 

If we are willing to increase the “deficit” and keep pumping money into the economy then obviously the can go on for a lot longer. Which I am fine with.

 

@Corcaigh @PeterMP I would have thought more than 100 people die in NYC/day.

 

Quote

 

Edited March 26, 2020 by CousinsCowgirl84