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

[Jeff Lebowski]

are there people out there who think economic hardships don't cost lives?

I doubt it.

Are there people out there that think that losing a few million people won't cause economic hardship?

[wuapinmon]

I doubt it.

Are there people out there that think that losing a few million people won't cause economic hardship?

Zorg does.

[All-American]

I doubt it.

Are there people out there that think that losing a few million people won't cause economic hardship?

Nah, it's just the olds, yo.

[Walter Sobchak]

How many people should we be willing to sacrifice in order to save the economy? Give us a number please.

There is a good faith debate about how to address this with a lot of things to consider, including economic devastation and the lives that will impact and cost. Have you thought about that? I don't appreciate your effort to shame in this way with your simple-minded binary formulation.

lower bound of 35k (2018-2019 flu deaths) and upper bound 60k (2017-2018 flu deaths) is a good ballpark of an acceptable range.

[jay santos]

I'm leaning towards the WS SU side here. If I had to choose between my business and my 95 year old grandfather to die this year, well gramps you lived a great life.

[Pelado]

I'm leaning towards the WS SU side here. If I had to choose between my business and my 95 year old grandfather to die this year, well gramps you lived a great life.

[wuapinmon]

I'm leaning towards the WS SU side here. If I had to choose between my business and my 95 year old grandfather to die this year, well gramps you lived a great life.

What about your own life? Your wife's? Your kids'? How about a sibling's? A parent's?

[All-American]

I'm leaning towards the WS SU side here. If I had to choose between my business and my 95 year old grandfather to die this year, well gramps you lived a great life.

As someone with a 95 year old grandfather I am not sure I agree.

[Uncle Ted]

I doubt it.

Are there people out there that think that losing a few million people won't cause economic hardship?

Depends on the people, I guess... if it is pretty much just the old they are already a drain. Maybe this is Drumpf's plan to save social security.

I know folks that have already lost their jobs because of this. Both are in the Orlando area and depend on Walt Disney World (indirectly) for their livelihood. As soon as their bosses heard that WDW was shutting down they got laid off. One without any severance. He pretty much lives paycheck to paycheck and may be homeless before too long.

[wuapinmon]

As someone with a 95 year old grandfather I am not sure I agree.

As someone with a grandfather, I also do not agree. He is 96, but, if he were 70 or 100, I would not want to lose him to something as pedestrian as COVID-19. My family members either go from pneumonia or from crazy shit. I prefer the crazy shit deaths; they make for better storytelling.

[Walter Sobchak]

I'm leaning towards the WS SU side here.

The media-amplified FUD from this shitshow will generate disproportionate long-standing negative consequences that we will likely have to live with and deal with for decades. Bush leveraged 9/11 to create the TSA and waste trillions in Iraq... now try and imagine what Trump will do with border policy, travel restrictions, etc.

[wuapinmon]

What would happen if Congress just said "No one may charge any rent for any reason during the month of April. Mortgages need not be paid. We will pretend that the month of April is just an extension of March. Businesses impacted from this may seek redress with Congress in order to maintain wages of employees affected by this who make less than $150k per year."

That's a rough, rough draft, but, could something like that work? I don't understand the larger ramifications to the economy, but I know that it would save a lot of people who find themselves out of work and no paycheck.

[PaloAltoCougar]

The discussions about how many and what types of people we're willing to let die are odd, as if anyone can know prospectively and with any precision how this will shake out. There will be plenty of second-guessing and 20-20 hindsight, but only after this thing is over. Meanwhile, for those advocating a laissez-faire response, I think of General Jack D. Ripper in the classic Dr. Strangelove:

Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks.

[Scott R Nelson]

I know folks that have already lost their jobs because of this.

My son-in-law had to lay off 80 people this morning. He's a manager at a large warehouse that mostly serves the entertainment industry.

What would happen if Congress just said "No one may charge any rent for any reason during the month of April. Mortgages need not be paid. We will pretend that the month of April is just an extension of March. Businesses impacted from this may seek redress with Congress in order to maintain wages of employees affected by this who make less than $150k per year."

That's a rough, rough draft, but, could something like that work? I don't understand the larger ramifications to the economy, but I know that it would save a lot of people who find themselves out of work and no paycheck.

Sounds good unless you have a bank, or rental properties. I guess that would be a way for more people to share the pain.

[SeattleUte]

Did anyone hear the epidemiologist and associate professor at NYU on NPR this morning? I think it was the Takeaway. She says that the travel bans will "slow the virus spread by a few days." Nobody is saying this lockdown will ultimately save lives. It is setting us up for an inevitable second wave as once we emerge from our hovels there will be little immunity. Nobody knows how this will turn out.

Meanwhile, only Lebowski is claiming this is good for the economy.