Will this end up being the pandemic that cried wolf?

[smmco]

Not sure you understood what I was saying but okay.

You are right. I didn't.

 

[hopemax]

Horrible economic situations lead to death. Why is that so hard?

What's interesting is that while suicide rates definitely go up during recessions, historical evidence suggests other causes of deaths go down, resulting in a net decline. It's counter-intuitive, but apparently people have been looking at the numbers since the 1920s.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00210-0
This suggests a targeted approach to dealing with the negative consequences might need to be in order, without panicking about the overall situation. We could, for instance, target funds to the states' Social Services, like we are doing for unemployment, to make sure states that are facing budget crisis don't have to cut services that need to be ramped up during this time, like suicide prevention and child services, instead of telling states they are on their own and may need to declare bankruptcy.

 

[luvsJack]

Correct, but our grandparents survived a depression and/or came from poverty - o we know it can be done. While I'm obviously still working, my sister's small business is in jeopardy. She does not agree with demonstrators, however, and knows it's not a good idea to rush back to normal.

I don’t agree with demonstrators necessarily either. Or more it’s that I don't agree with them demonstrating.

My grandparents survived the depression and my mom grew up dirt poor. They survived. Not everyone did though. So again, as a nation, yes. As individuals, you can’t say for sure.

And maybe it’s not hurting your sister in the same way but MANY small businesses will not come back from this. We don’t know how it will effect those individuals and their families.

 

[cobright]

What? It’s a man’s opinion. Why would there be peer reviewed math on the cost of something that hasn’t been determined? Forgive me for not understanding.

We would like to take this seriously, but without the ability to see how and where he arrives at his conclusions we can't trust his facts, and without knowing more about him it's hard to trust his opinions.

What you posted is not "a man's opinion" it's an argument against quarantine efforts; conclusions based on this person analysis, much of which is lacking from the selection you posted. You have furthered this argument with appeals to this man's credentials (his education and professional history).

Generally, to be considered, an argument must be based on a statement of fact or empirical data (strongest), logical conclusions drawn from facts or data (strength of argument based on the rigor of methodology), or the analysis of an expert (little stronger than an opinion, rarely suitable alone).

This unnamed economist wasn't giving an opinion, he was presenting his ideas as facts in order to influence his audience's decisions.

• We are paying $3 trillion per month to maintain social distancing.
  • This is a statement of fact and is completely unsupported, but it becomes the foundation of nearly all his subsequent arguments.
• We spend approximately $900 billion per year on defense. That means in the next nine days, we will spend as much staying in place as we spend on our largest budget item for the whole year. How long is that sustainable? Not long.
  • It's actually more like $1.4T when all defense spending and costs are factored.
  • Again, $100B a day is a compelling premise for a change in policy but he makes no effort to support this premise with an argument.
  • And... how much do you think we would be spending on defense if it were a foreign nation killing off 2k civillians a day for the last 2 months? Would we be hearing, "Staying in shelters is too expensive, stopping the enemy is too expensive, go about your day, eventually they'll run out of bombs."
• Unless you can show me how $3 trillion per month is sustainable, I must conclude that social distancing must end in the not-to-distant future.
  • Again, a factual conclusion based on that one single, unsupported, premise.
• When we do, COVID-19 will be waiting for us. Social distancing cannot eradicate the virus. It can only push it off to some point into the not-to-distant future. All these lives we are supposedly saving now will die then. We haven't saved any lives.
  • A terrifying statement of fact that he makes no effort to support. There are countries right now controlling their new case count with testing and relaxed social distancing guidelines.
• Science tells us what that solution is. Herd immunity. That will eradicate the virus. Social distancing won't.
  • Three statements of fact that are each disputed by the WHO and CDC, that he makes no effort to support.
• What is the cost of obtaining herd immunity? It is the cost of protecting the vulnerable populations while the virus blows through the non-vulnerable populations. I don't know how much that would cost but I am sure it is a fraction of the $3 trillion we are spending on shelter in place.
  • Another iteration of the same argument. A cost comparison between two cases. One case cost he admits to not knowing. The second he claims to know but does not show the math.
  • the cost of letting the virus "blow through the non-vulnerable populations" is thousands and thousands of unnecessary deaths. The president's own advisers have said so.
• Stay at home orders are like a temporary stay of execution. Once it expires (as it must due to it being unsustainable), then people die. We haven't saved lives.
  • Again, a statement of fact. One that is proven false by the nations like Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea that have a fraction of our numbers even though their self isolation orders are very relaxed or even voluntary.
• Focusing on protecting the vulnerable and letting herd immunity develop is like a pardon. Lives will be saved.
  • Again, this is not a statement of opinion. He's stating a fact without supporting it.

Also, lets clear something up...

He explains that the food supply is already in crisis from this. Our food supply. The people who provide food to your grocery store will be going out of business in a few months. Let that sink in.)

Our food supply is at risk because the meat packing industry is a hotbed of coronavirus outbreaks. Agro-centric local economies are located in the states that have been most reluctant (for whatever reasons, even those we don't discuss on Dis) to issue strict stay-at-home orders and mandate adequate worker protection policies. Smithfield and JBS meatpacking plants employ who this author would describe as non-vulnerable and they're getting sick at an alarming rate.

Lockdown orders are not affecting the demand for food. It's causing some supply chain mismatch issues as more people are eating from home, but the shortages are largely a result of workers getting sick.

But many states aren’t reporting recovered which is critical to know active cases. No, but active cases, recovered and deaths are really all just lagging indicators of new cases. I agree the impetus is on statistical reporting of new cases and deaths, but if you know those two you kinda know the other (with a 2-3 week delay). Nobody gets this bug and, instead of dying, turns into a dragon or something (if only though...).

 

[sam_gordon]

Correct, but our grandparents survived a depression and/or came from poverty - o we know it can be done. While I'm obviously still working, my sister's small business is in jeopardy. She does not agree with demonstrators, however, and knows it's not a good idea to rush back to normal.

Our nation survived the Spanish flu.
Our nation will survive COVID-19.
Some individuals will not survive COVID-19.
Some individuals will not survive economic ruin.

 

[Boardwalk Jedi]

Ye

Just more insults and prejudice. Do you have anything constructive to add to the conversation?

Yep. But it’s hard to be constructive with someone who equates this with the flu and thinks these “low numbers” have nothing to do with us staying home.

 

[Boardwalk Jedi]

Our nation survived the Spanish flu.
Our nation will survive COVID-19.
Some individuals will not survive COVID-19.
Some individuals will not survive economic ruin.

And your solution is?

 

[BuckeyeBama]

And your solution is?

Do you disagree with that post?

I am not sure that there is a solution that will make either at risk group totally without risk. We need to find a way to minimize the risks of both groups as much as possible, without abandoning either.

 

[Boardwalk Jedi]

As I said...she doesn’t

I don’t agree with demonstrators necessarily either. Or more it’s that I don't agree with them demonstrating.

My grandparents survived the depression and my mom grew up dirt poor. They survived. Not everyone did though. So again, as a nation, yes. As individuals, you can’t say for sure.

And maybe it’s not hurting your sister in the same way but MANY small businesses will not come back from this. We don’t know how it will effect those individuals and their families.

She doesn’t know if hers will survive either. But she knows jumping back in is not going to be helpful either.

 

[sam_gordon]

And your solution is?

Continue gradual returns to "normal". I don't think lockdowns should be continued much past June 1. You definitely can't wait for a vaccine. Good thing I'm not being paid to come up with one.

 

[xuxa777]

Yeah, this one doesn't pass the smell test for me. If you have COVID and overdose, which kills you, then the CoD should be overdose, not COVID.

Still, I doubt this is an issue of concern.

There are many stories popping up like this

 

[fatmanatee]

There are many stories popping up like this

How many is plenty? A handful? Dozens?

 

[Cogswel_Cogs]

Not sure this came up. but how long did we lock down durring Spanish Flu?

 

[NYCgrrl]

Not sure this came up. but how long did we lock down durring Spanish Flu?

Different regions, states, and cities did it for varying amt of times.

This link will give you an idea:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...-curve-1918-spanish-flu-pandemic-coronavirus/

 

[fatmanatee]

Would be interested in seeing an update to this.

 

[elle21]

We would like to take this seriously, but without the ability to see how and where he arrives at his conclusions we can't trust his facts, and without knowing more about him it's hard to trust his opinions.

What you posted is not "a man's opinion" it's an argument against quarantine efforts; conclusions based on this person analysis, much of which is lacking from the selection you posted. You have furthered this argument with appeals to this man's credentials (his education and professional history).

Generally, to be considered, an argument must be based on a statement of fact or empirical data (strongest), logical conclusions drawn from facts or data (strength of argument based on the rigor of methodology), or the analysis of an expert (little stronger than an opinion, rarely suitable alone).

This unnamed economist wasn't giving an opinion, he was presenting his ideas as facts in order to influence his audience's decisions.



Also, lets clear something up...

Our food supply is at risk because the meat packing industry is a hotbed of coronavirus outbreaks. Agro-centric local economies are located in the states that have been most reluctant (for whatever reasons, even those we don't discuss on Dis) to issue strict stay-at-home orders and mandate adequate worker protection policies. Smithfield and JBS meatpacking plants employ who this author would describe as non-vulnerable and they're getting sick at an alarming rate.

Lockdown orders are not affecting the demand for food. It's causing some supply chain mismatch issues as more people are eating from home, but the shortages are largely a result of workers getting sick.

no, sadly that’s not why the food supply is at risk. It’s due to the low prices, and the effects of the plummeting economy right now. The agriculture trade apparently has had several bad years in a row of low prices...they were starting to recover in the fall but now it’s going down again. They don’t have savings to be able to float through this slump. The price the farmers are getting for processing a cow is so low right now it doesn’t cover costs. Corn prices are so low they aren’t making a profit. If they can’t break even or make money, they can’t keep producing.
I’ve always laughed at the idea of ‘prepping’. Not laughing so much now.

 

[xuxa777]

And also Positive covid patients in NYC were sent to nursing homes that had no positive cases, the sent patients recovered fine but multiple deaths from covid occurred among the residents of the nursing home.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/23/coron...ed-to-queens-nursing-home-with-body-bags/amp/

 

[fatmanatee]

Not sure this came up. but how long did we lock down durring Spanish Flu?

Funny you mention this, because I recently bought a book about it, called The Great Influenza. Haven’t gotten to it yet (bc i realized i am probably too bogged down in flu stuff as it is) but from what I understand they dealt with similar complaints about lockdowns and how to handle the situation.

 

[Heather07438]

I am very curious to see numbers for antibody screen in our area.

Maybe 20% have already been exposed? Who really can say until more testing is developed and available. It might be only 5% exposure or even under 3% and almost everybody is still vulnerable.

That's one of the unique things about this virus. With a small amount of cases is stays relatively quiet. Once it hits a certain higher amount of cases, it explodes exponentially like crazy.

 

[CarolAnn856]

Funny you mention this, because I recently bought a book about it, called The Great Influenza. Haven’t gotten to it yet (bc i realized i am probably too bogged down in flu stuff as it is) but from what I understand they dealt with similar complaints about lockdowns and how to handle the situation.

True, they did. And as a result, Philly opened up too soon and the effects were devastating.