At what point did you / will you take the coronavirus epidemic seriously?

[Pelado]

Random lunchtime thought: Imagine all of the dissertations, theses, and papers that will be written in the coming years about government steps, missteps and omissions during this period. Addressing all of the scientific, medical, social, governmental, fasting, and other issues may compel universities to create a College of Covid Studies.

fify

[swampfrog]

So the real question is how quickly COVID-19 is destroyed after the fast tomorrow. I think Monday at the latest.

What species of seagull is it that eats viruses again?

[Flystripper]

What species of seagull is it that eats viruses again?

this one

[swampfrog]

this one

Is that a Chinese Seagull? Or just an expat that has adapted to local custom?

[Jeff Lebowski]

So the real question is how quickly COVID-19 is destroyed after the fast tomorrow. I think Monday at the latest.

No humor in this thread! SU won't allow it.

[creekster]

The fast won't work. We need science.

That's gold, Jerry. GOLD!

[Jeff Lebowski]

First give me your tolerable number of deaths for a virus that's killing people with average age of 79.5 and people who generally already have another serious medical condition. 50K? 1M? I'll go with 100K.

Next, include an assumption that preserving the economy is also extremely important.

Next, look at the worldwide data and US data in terms of number of cases and lives lost.

Next, include an assumption that with deaths at 16K and cases at 450K and the economy completely in the toilet, experts are telling us we're reaching the peak in terms of total cases.

Given that, do you think it's extremely likely that a slightly less extreme reaction to handling the virus could have improved the economic impact while keeping loss of life in the tolerable range?

(more importantly) Also, do you think it's extremely likely that relaxing restrictions with a priority on kick starting the economy immediately while minimizing risk in as many areas as possible, different guidelines for urban vs less urban areas, wearing masks, work from home where possible, no handshakes, keep school online until the year is out, keep old and vulnerable people quarantined, etc, could all that take place immediately while keeping the loss of life in the tolerable range?

I understand why hipster morons on fb are still exaggerating the need for economic shutdown to control a virus that's taken 16K lives, but I don't understand why smart people here are doing so.

Jay, there is no scenario where we could get through this without massive damage to the economy. If you don't shutdown you get Spain/Italy X10 in terms of overwhelming the medical capacity. If you think people would go on with life as usual while the bodies pile up in the hospitals and morgues, you are crazy. And you would have to convince the entire world to look the other way while the deaths are happening. That is just not realistic and that is why even the top economists are near unanimous that the lockdown was necessary.

[SeattleUte]

Random lunchtime thoughts: Imagine all of the dissertations, theses, and papers that will be written in the coming years about government steps, missteps and omissions during this period. Addressing all of the scientific, medical, social, governmental and other issues may compel universities to create a College of Covid Studies.

And in the midst of said thoughts, I was reminded of the Charlton Heston movie, The Omega Man, in which a plague has either killed most of the world's citizens or turned them into mutant gangs. Mr. Heston, with his usual understated performance, plays a guy who's immune but ends up saving the world by dying, with his blood being used to provide antibodies to immunize the surviving few. Could happen.

I remember this film. Loved it.

I've been thinking of The Plague by Camus. He intended the plague he invented to be a metaphor for fascism, they say. I've been wondering the metaphor that our plague signifies. It's very novelistic. Kills mostly old people. It's main impact may be psychological.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I guess that's good news if we are ready to start strategically opening back up. But do this for another 60 days and watch how quickly those furloughs become permanent layoffs.

Agreed. Will be interesting to see how this plays out. We are in completely uncharted waters.

I am surprised that the stock market hasn't dropped lower than it has. Anyone else feeling that way? I am not brave enough to move to cash, but I feel like we are nowhere near the bottom.

EDIT: This guy agrees with me. Predicts that we will hit the bottom in August.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/st...-it-2020-04-09

[Bo Diddley]

Agreed. Will be interesting to see how this plays out. We are in completely uncharted waters.

I am surprised that the stock market hasn't dropped lower than it has. Anyone else feeling that way? I am not brave enough to move to cash, but I feel like we are nowhere near the bottom.

EDIT: This guy agrees with me. Predicts that we will hit the bottom in August.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/st...-it-2020-04-09

Absolutely agree we are still a ways from the bottom. I don't think enough economic pain has been shared yet. Kind of like the lag between known COVID-19 cases and deaths. Plus there's a lot of money being sent out from the government. I wouldn't be surprised if the market goes down for another year or so.

[Bo Diddley]

But a lot of it depends on how fast we can restart things, and how many changes in spending become more permanent, and how COVID-19 reemerges for a second round.

[Flystripper]

Absolutely agree we are still a ways from the bottom. I don't think enough economic pain has been shared yet. Kind of like the lag between known COVID-19 cases and deaths. Plus there's a lot of money being sent out from the government. I wouldn't be surprised if the market goes down for another year or so.

Q2 earning announcements in the summer and Q3 in the fall will result in the market bouncing along the bottom. The recovery this week isn't based on anything other than hope.

[SeattleUte]

This is happening all over.

How Viktor Orbán Used the Coronavirus to Seize More Power
https://www.newyorker.com/news/lette...ize-more-power

[Jeff Lebowski]

I understand why hipster morons on fb are still exaggerating the need for economic shutdown to control a virus that's taken 16K lives, but I don't understand why smart people here are doing so.

Jay, I realized my original post came off as mean so I deleted it, but not before you had already quoted it. I apologize. Peace, brother.

[SeattleUte]

Jay, there is no scenario where we could get through this without massive damage to the economy. If you don't shutdown you get Spain/Italy X10 in terms of overwhelming the medical capacity. If you think people would go on with life as usual while the bodies pile up in the hospitals and morgues, you are crazy. And you would have to convince the entire world to look the other way while the deaths are happening. That is just not realistic and that is why even the top economists are near unanimous that the lockdown was necessary.

I'm just going to say this. It's just a hunch as this is not my field. But I have to say that I've been skeptical of this claim that our system would become overloaded. Seattle is about as occupied as any city, and we have vacant space all over. It turns out the country has had more than enough capacity, and since the clamp down the models have bene continuously revised downward even assuming the clampdown. Why? Probably the death rate is overstated because they assumed the case death rate to be the total death rate. Or, Covid is not as contagious as assumed--less likely. We aren't Italy. We wouldn't have left people who could be saved to die without care. Even in Italy, what was happening was essentially euthanasia. If a patient has been two weeks in a coma and his organs are shutting down, chances of his survival are zilch. Yes, it would have stressed the health care industry, and distracted them for more profitable work (as it has).

If my hunch is right we've created a huge burden on the rest of the economy on behalf of the health care economy.

Not saying this is fact. It's opinion based on hunch.