Utopia Talk / Politics / The phoney lockdown debate

Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun May 10 02:01:44 There are some interesting graphs here comparing Seattle, NY, Miami and Stockholm (Sweden). It shows that government lockdowns are more like ratifying public behavior than anything else. The curves are more or less identical. ”And this is why I find the lockdown debate so phoney. It’s been fuelled, on both sides, by the presumption that government decrees work as a sort of magic wand that will bring our economies (and perhaps the most acute phase of the pandemic) back to life. But the data suggest there is no magic wand. Much of the lockdown effect was imposed not by top-down fiat, but through millions of small decisions made every day by civic groups, employers, unions, trade associations, school boards and, most importantly, ordinary people. Here in Toronto, where I live, for instance, I know relatively few people whose decision to work from home (or not work at all) was dictated by government order. Most white-collar employers told workers to stay at home days or weeks before official rules went into effect. And many service industries closed up shop because there simply weren’t any customers. Electricity-usage data reported by the New York Times, similarly, show that people became homebodies well before they were required to do so.” A good read for the ”muh economy” crowd. http://qui...th-the-phoney-lockdown-debate/
Rugian Member	Sun May 10 07:42:52 1. Biased toward urban centers 2. Biased towards users of public transit (which would be most heavily affected by a pandemic outbreak), when 95% of American households have access to cars (which would be least heavily affected) 3. Does nothing to support the use of compulsive government measures, as opposed to individual voluntary self-enforcement Yeah when my office re-opens I won't be taking the subway for a long while either. That's about the only takeaway from this though.
Forwyn Member	Sun May 10 08:12:18 And yet, legacy media and leftists decried states that didn't issue mandatory lockdown orders, even though percentages of people staying home were roughly the same.
Seb Member	Sun May 10 11:40:12 Nim: Yeah, I did try to point that out a bit. You can only lift lockdown if you can command confidence that there is a solution in place. If you can't, then all that happens is you get enough people out to spread the disease and create a second spike, eroding the ability to command enough confidence to actually get out when the circumstances are in place. But you won't get people going out and consuming like they did before. It's the worst of all worlds.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun May 10 11:45:02 The take away Rugian, is that the virus wrecks the economy regardless. Urban centers being the economy in urbanized societies, which is virtually all of them. Would be great if people acted responsibly and not demonstrate outside of hospitals, otherwise the terrorvirus wins. However people are apparently retarded and they do shit like that. Generally I feel you should be able to be retarded, it’s your own ass. Those principles scale poorly when people spread a disease that kills people.
Daemon Member	Sun May 10 11:48:14 "Would be great if people acted responsibly and not demonstrate outside of hospitals, otherwise the terrorvirus wins." http://www...ueber-1-0-article21770247.html Just see the picture: demonstration in Germany against lockdown, idiots ruin everything
sam adams Member	Sun May 10 12:05:02 An important takeaway from this is that public transportation sucks.
Seb Member	Sun May 10 14:42:46 Whelp, the UK is one again showing the world how not to do it. Once you rule out the US for just being too extreme to take seriously, only the UK offers actual examples of policies you really can imagine a very incompetent and cynical govt actually taking. Sort of like the mayor in Jaws keeping the beaches open, only actually our present PM used to wheel out a story emphasising exactly how the Mayor was in fact the true hero of jaws for precisely that reason. But the idiots elected him anyway. They say if you cannot be a shining beacon, you should at least be a terrible cautionary warning.
sam adams Member	Sun May 10 18:34:18 ^still has double our deathrate "Waaaaaaa you cant look at death rate that makes us look bad and the us look good thats not fair" -seb "Waaaa your death rate will catch up with ours soon enough" -seb, for 2 strait months "Everyone stay home forever. I know my burueacrats cant tell you when the vaccines or testing might be ready, and the manhours lost to the shutdown is now passing the manhours that would be lost to the virus even if everyone got it, but still stay home" -seb "Why doesnt anyone listen to me?" -seb "
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon May 11 02:01:06 Uhm yea and he has a point about the death rate. The UK has 4-5 times the pop density of the USA, if you want to keep comparing ”per capita” numbers like that. Now, NY state has almost the same pop density as the UK and it has a death rate almost 3 times the UK.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon May 11 02:04:07 ”Everyone stay home for 2-4 weeks.” -seb
Seb Member	Mon May 11 04:40:52 Sam: Per-capita normalisation make no sense when the outbreak clusters remain localised. This is why the death rates between Italy, France and UK and the US in the exponential phase were so similar: in the places where there were corona virus outbreaks in those countries, they were actually similar in the key parameters that mattered. This is kinda obvious when you think about it for more than half a second. Outbreaks will largely be centred around metropolitan areas where conditions are ideal for spread, not the boondocks of sparsely populated towns that fill out the countries and contribute to the differences. Even age breakdowns in metropolitan areas are more comparable than at a national level. And of course not every metropolitan area is affected. So of course per capita normalisation will be complete nonsense. As Nim says, you should compare to local values where the outbreaks are. But even that doesn't disguise the main issue: The US death rate is still holding steady. The UK's is falling. The US had a longer lead time to prepare, and has taken much longer to get the death rate falling. There is no reason that the general direction of the death rate should be dependent on population. The US still hasn't got a grip on the crisis. The UK has, finally, but is about to decide to let it go again, because that's how we roll now. The rest of the world watches both countries with a mix of horror and despair. Sam just thinks it is a great way to improve demography.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 04:41:39 Nim: I think it was 4-8 weeks to be fair. But yeah, we are talking about a matter of weeks to get the infrastructure in place.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 04:42:46 Anyway, Boris has adopted Sam's preferred approach of encouraging everyone back to work, and avoiding public transport. So lets see how this works out.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 05:24:00 Looking at the chart and extrapolation the current trend, we would be expect to hit 100 deaths a day (let's call that the threshold for track and trace) in about 35 days. So what I'd have done is about two weeks ago announced the kind of general strategy the pm announced now, with clear thresholds. That would have moved the conversation at from "liberation" that the press have been pushing, and prevented the kind of breakdown on the back of rumoured easings we saw this bank holiday weekend. That would also give businesses time to start developing and implementing workplace changes. In the mean time, track and trace needs the same kind of effort put behind ventilators in the UK. It clearly isn't getting that, and been largely conducted with a view to meet on the hoof targets for political performance. Classic example of bad targets creating perverse incentives: focusing on 100k tests a day rather than on fast turnaround. Ultimately you need both but right now we have 100k with over a week to turnaround a result. Which is useless (except for statistical sampling, though we aren't doing that). So first you'd fix that. Build a core testing capability around fast turnaround, and begin rolling out contact tracing around care home cases etc, and expand out from there. Then you can open up with clarity and confidence. Because the real thing to avoid economic damage is to avoid scarring that comes from job losses and a general feedback of lost demand. That means when the economy opens it needs to open strongly. If say 10%-20% of people don't change their behaviour, demand crash will lead to businesses going under, no job losses and further crash in demand. Govts have likely one shot at doing this right. Fiscal and financial measures need to support the quick bounce back. This means shifting furlough schemes to subsidise firms costs for people in work (while demand is weak) to allow them to remain open while demand is still ramping up or topping up half time pay. Cutting furlough pay to workers alone is dumb: the employee can't choose to be furloughed or not, and the primary reason an employer furloughs someone is that they can't afford to have them at work - not simply because the employee doesn't want to risk work. But again, this will all only work if everyone feels it is safe to resume normal patterns of consumption. This means well trailed messages with broad support, and demonstrable safety measures as well as confidence that everyone is going to jump the same way. If you think there's a chance a big downturn will come because the govts measures will fail, you'll hoard cash and reduce consumption. "Fuck you, get back to work, I'll be fine, but the economy needs you!" doesn't do that. Do this the right way, and economically all you'll see is a spike on govt debt which can be inflated away over a century.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 05:26:20 Do this the half arsed Sam way, and you'll see destruction of industries, widespread unemployment and economic scarring as a result - people made redundant over the age of 45 have a high likelihood of never working again, and anyone made redundant during a recession tends to have a higher likelihood of permanently lower wage trajectory than they would have done - that will take half a decade to fix.
jergul large member	Mon May 11 06:53:37 Seb The main fly in that particular ointment is cycles. 1997, 2001, 2008, 2014, 2020. The public cannot continue to take on risk without profit. Its not debt we can inflate away over a century. Its debt that is waiting for a few years to become even more debt. I think the way forward is to let capitalism play by its own rules - and buy out distressed assets instead of bailing out distressed assets. Systematically employed, it would dramatically increase public ownership of the economy. I am not adverse to sell-backs down to 34% when the economy improves. But ultimately, private ownership is turned out to be extremely problematic across the board. The public should give capitalism a go and use the power of liquidity to both profit and take on risk.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 07:10:55 Jergul: A valid point. But then that leads to potential for companies to avoid taking loans and pass losses off through redundancies; which you don't want from a macroeconomic point either. Plus taking stakes in SMEs which aren't listed is a nightmare. I think a mix of measures - direct subsidy of employment to avoid scarring and maintain demand; soft loans for those needing cashflow; equity for cash for those needing to restructure or capital injection. I'd prefer a more hawkish approach in normal downturns. Note though, the taxpayer can take a loss in those circumstances in forcing buyouts early to get the systemic benefit before the price collapse has materialised. See RBS, Lloyds TSB. Hopefully these kinds of pandemic will continue to be once a century events . And of course the cost falling on taxpayer should focus Finance depts on the moral hazards of underfunding contingency planning and resilience. I can be far more forgiving of private companies failure to plan for natural catastrophes of this scale than the govt, who is mandated to prepare for such events.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 07:12:24 And as always, clear segmentation on aid intended to target workers Vs intended to support business. They should work in concert, but you need to avoid the latter capturing aid intended to support the former at their expense and undermining the policy intent.
Rugian Member	Mon May 11 08:53:35 Nim This thread got away from us, but nobody was arguing that the economy would completely bounce back to pre-March levels. Even before the lockdowns, many businesses were closing their doors, restricting their operations, or having employees work from home; it makes sense that many of those companies would continue to do so once the lockdowns are lifted. The point of reopening is to allow the economy to start the process of recovery and allow businesses that can safely operate to do so. As long as only essential workers and telecommuting professionals are allowed to work, there is a huge swath of the population that is effectively sidelined from employment.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 09:11:26 Rugian: Being able to safely operate when there is reduced or no demand, and furloughing and other support is removed, will simply mean that companies currently in mothballs will go bankrupt fast. It converts someone on furlough with a job to go back to into someone redundant, or simply laid off because their company has gone bust. It will make the economy worse than it is on support (and probably the fiscal position too). You can really only get this to work well if there is widespread confidence it will work.
Rugian Member	Mon May 11 09:22:51 Seb Economic activity pre-lockdown was subdued, not eliminated. We have seen plenty of examples of people flocking back to stores or other venues when they re-open. Of course this is not true for all industries or all locations. Some places (a high-end restaurant in Manhattan, perhaps) cant currently reopen in a way that makes economic sense. But some businesses can. Lockdowns are mostly blanket measures which indiscriminately stifle businesses, whether they are currently viable or not. That's why they should be loosened or lifted ASAP. (Also because of the whole constitutional thing, but that's a different argument)
Rugian Member	Mon May 11 09:26:51 Or you could just insist on keeping a huge chunk of him the population on 60% furlough pay. As if that is an acceptable measure for anything more than a month or two.
hood Member	Mon May 11 09:37:16 It should be noted that more significant actions taken to combat an outbreak has resulted in better economic recovery after the fact than a lax reaction. In typical retard-businessman fashion, rugian is advocating for next quarter results at the expense of next decade performance.
Rugian Member	Mon May 11 09:40:58 I assume you're talking about a different pandemic, because theres no way you can objectively make that statement with this one. Anyway, New York recently did a study that showed 66% of infected patients had been staying at home. So much for the retarded argument of "going as fascist as possible is the best way to combat Covid."
Hrothgar Member	Mon May 11 10:07:43 Population density needs to be much more a focus on efforts to slow the infection rate. There isn't a one size fits all answer to balancing freedom and slowing the spread of an infection disease. Major Metropolis vs heavily suburb single family house cities vs small cities vs small towns vs farm lands.
hood Member	Mon May 11 10:41:52 Yes, rugian, I am talking about historic pandemics. The cities/states/countries that reacted quicker and more severe had better economic recovery than the locations that didn't. Feel free to provide sound logical reasoning, with evidence, to suggest why the current data driven analysis wouldn't apply to this one. Else, fuck off with your "because I want it to be" bullshit. Just say no to the pro-plague death cultist extreme right.
Rugian Member	Mon May 11 11:12:43 Ooh, someone's angry today. Did your morning lox come without schmear or something? There is no evidence that we cant reopen certain sectors of the economy while maintaining protections for high-risk individuals. The onus on you is to demonstrate how a one-size-fits-all lockdown is somehow preferable, despite the massive economic and social damage its causing.
Dakyron Member	Mon May 11 11:12:55 "I think it was 4-8 weeks to be fair. But yeah, we are talking about a matter of weeks to get the infrastructure in place. " Uhh... no. You told me repeatedly that the lockdown needed to last 16 weeks, or roughly 4 months. "Population density needs to be much more a focus on efforts to slow the infection rate. There isn't a one size fits all answer to balancing freedom and slowing the spread of an infection disease. Major Metropolis vs heavily suburb single family house cities vs small cities vs small towns vs farm lands. " Exactly. This is what Seb is not understanding. Arizona has roughly the population of Sweden and has had only 500 deaths(and majority of those were nursing homes and Navajo nation). Sweden has had over 3200. Yet, he foams at the mouth over American incompetence. "Yes, rugian, I am talking about historic pandemics. The cities/states/countries that reacted quicker and more severe had better economic recovery than the locations that didn't. " Do you have evidence to support this, or this another "talk out of my ass" argument, like when you said that being able to express yourself on the internet satisfied the constitutional right of peaceful assembly.
sam adams Member	Mon May 11 11:49:02 "The cities/states/countries that reacted quicker and more severe had better economic recovery than the locations that didn't." This is true only if the pandemic is severe. This one is not severe enough to warrant severe lockdowns.
sam adams Member	Mon May 11 11:50:07 Seb, you arent getting track and trace set up in your shithole in 6 weeks.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon May 11 12:01:46 Rugian Let's recap. No one thinks the lockdown should go on forever, that extreme does not exist, period. There are however plenty of people advocate no lock down at all, including you. The best way to deal with a virus is to go early and hard. That means losing all schools and kindergardens, all non essential work and all major social events. Everything! A fine or up to a year in prison for violating city or national ordinance is reasonable imo. At what case fatality to you believe this to be reasonable?
Seb Member	Mon May 11 12:18:22 Dakyron: The only way that is remotely true is if you are counting the time in lockdown prior to when I posted. Given the length you need to be in lockdown depends on when you started, and anything done to date is sunk cost, I'm not sure that would be relevant. http://www...hread=85613&time=1588861696064 Throughout the thread I say month, 6 weeks etc. E.g. "For me it's a no brainer. The evidence and reasonable assumptions point to maintaining lockdown for another six weeks to implement track and trace, with only very cautious and limited easements until then" Perhaps you misread 16?
Seb Member	Mon May 11 12:28:59 Dakyron: "This is what Seb is not understanding. Arizona has roughly the population of Sweden and has had only 500 deaths(and majority of those were nursing homes and Navajo nation). Sweden has had over 3200. Yet, he foams at the mouth over American incompetence." What you fail to understand is that I've never suggested a one size fits all policy. What you fail to understand is you need to have consistent (not uniform) policies. Otherwise you will get infection spreading back into cleared places. This is why you need track and trace. Now, it's great that Arizona is doing well, but you can hardly say that the US as a whole is. The death rate is staying steady long after the point where all other major countries have got it declining significantly. And New York rates are declining. The reason why is because as NY rates decline, it is growing in other states. Because you don't have a national policy. And your federal govt, or its leaders at least, are actively pushing States to open up when they aren't ready. The result is you are going to end up with Corona virus free circulating for ages. What that means is while there may be a very few people in Arizona at any given time who have the virus, because population density there keeps R at around 1 or less with no restrictions, until you have a national tracing program in place, people from Arizona remain a huge threat to major metropolitan areas as they can reintroduce the infection and force them to shut down again. So it's not quite as simple as "yaay, Arizona can do its own thing as the conditions for a major outbreak don't exist gets". You are, effectively, helping keep the areas that are more at risk of exponential growth stuck in lock down. Internationally, the way we handle this is with travel bans and quarantine on traveling across borders (except the UK, because we are led by an idiot). So from a macro perspective, the fact Arizona is doing great isn't realy relevant. The following remains true: 1. The US still hasn't got the disease contained and under control - rather it appears to be spreading to new areas even as old areas get a grip 2. You don't have an effect set of policies and processes in place to open up. You are going to get second spikes as soon as you do.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 12:29:45 And Sweden is also quite incompetent. It adopted the same policy as the UK.
hood Member	Mon May 11 12:37:41 "There is no evidence that we cant reopen certain sectors of the economy while maintaining protections for high-risk individuals." He says, without evidence. Meanwhile, I'll cite the fact that we're still on the upswing of new cases despite the restrictions in place. You open the flood gates, even a little, and things explode again, undoing everything the quarantine was trying to stop. "Did your morning lox come without schmear or something?" Lox sounds good, actually. But your racist jabbering is off the mark. Being uncivil with retarded cultists != angry. "Do you have evidence to support this, or this another "talk out of my ass" argument, like when you said that being able to express yourself on the internet satisfied the constitutional right of peaceful assembly." Someone still salty about losing hard? http://ars...latten-the-economic-curve-too/ @sam: That doesn't appear to be the case based on the study. But either way, a soft reopening is just asking for an even worse bounce back for the # infected. The CDC has even predicted such an outcome.
sam adams Member	Mon May 11 12:57:52 If the uk death rate is falling, why are you constantly pegged at 2x ours? Lol dumbseb.
sam adams Member	Mon May 11 13:04:20 "But either way, a soft reopening is just asking for an even worse bounce back for the # infected." Indeed. With medical science failing to get a vacine anytime soon... and bureacrats like seb and trump failing utterly to coordinate testing... it might be time to just get infected and get it over with.
Dakyron Member	Mon May 11 14:52:14 "Throughout the thread I say month, 6 weeks etc. " - Seb lying. "Orderly management, or disorderly catastrophe based on chasing a benefit of 8 weeks of the cost of lockdown on the basis of hoping all the dice come up good? " - Seb claiming we need 8 more weeks of lockdown after the initial 8 weeks. "We ought to be well on the way to building track and trace capability. Say 8 more weeks max. " - Seb claiming 8 more weeks is needed again. "I'd say around 8 weeks I'd estimate for the UK and most European countries (as I've said a number of times). " - Seb again claiming 8 more weeks. If you lie about something this trivial, what else are you lying about?
Seb Member	Mon May 11 14:54:50 Sam: Impossible to say given you presented no source. Here's mine, you can clearly see UK daily deaths have fallen from 1000/day to under 500/day over the last 30 days while the US has fluctuated at just under 2000/day for the last 30 days. https://ig.ft.com/coronavirus-chart/?areas=usa&areas=gbr&cumulative=0&logScale=1&perMillion=0&values=deaths
Dakyron Member	Mon May 11 14:57:44 "What that means is while there may be a very few people in Arizona at any given time who have the virus, because population density there keeps R at around 1 or less with no restrictions, until you have a national tracing program in place, people from Arizona remain a huge threat to major metropolitan areas as they can reintroduce the infection and force them to shut down again. " Phoenix, AZ is the 5th largest city in the United States. This is not cowboys on ranches. There is something like 5 million people in the metro area. "So it's not quite as simple as "yaay, Arizona can do its own thing as the conditions for a major outbreak don't exist gets". You are, effectively, helping keep the areas that are more at risk of exponential growth stuck in lock down. " WTF is this logic? Its completely backwards. "1. The US still hasn't got the disease contained and under control - rather it appears to be spreading to new areas even as old areas get a grip " Depends on the state. If you are not California, New York, New Jersey, Michigan, or Florida, which are like the five worst run states in the US, then you are doing just fine. "2. You don't have an effect set of policies and processes in place to open up. You are going to get second spikes as soon as you do. " No. Sunlight, high temperatures, and moderate social distancing will prevent any future surge.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 15:00:26 Dakyron: Yes, a further 6-8 weeks, as I said. The very first line of my post to you "The only way that is remotely true is if you are counting the time in lockdown prior to when I posted" I think I addressed the point about the period prior to be a sunk cost, and how effective that was entirely up to national govts so a variable in any case. So calling me a liar is not just a bit cheap, it's entirely untrue. I didn't call for a 16 week lockdown. I said we needed 6-8 weeks before we could lift it.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 15:08:22 Dakyron: "Phoenix, AZ is the 5th largest city in the United States. This is not cowboys on ranches. There is something like 5 million people in the metro area." New York population density is about 28,000 per sq mile, phoenix is about 3000. "which are like the five worst run states in the US, then you are doing just fine." A ringing endorsement! If you are outside the current breakout clusters, it's all fine for now. "Sunlight, high temperatures," Yes. Like in enormously cold, wet Iran in Brazil.
sam adams Member	Mon May 11 15:52:59 "I didn't call for a 16 week lockdown. I said we needed 6-8 weeks before we could lift it." Sebmath: 8 plus 8 is not 16.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 15:58:51 Sam: 8 + 8 = 16, but there's no reason we needed to waste the first 8 weeks, and if we'd locked down two weeks earlier, we'd only be four weeks away from lifting it, not 6-8 weeks. And if we'd locked down 2 weeks before that, you could take another 2 weeks off the duration. You can't pin on me the consequences of your idiot policies.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 16:00:01 Also clearly I can count Sam. First thing I said was clearly to get to 16 he must be erroneously saying I thought we should have had an 8 week lockdown prior to my post.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 16:01:05 Actually, if we'd locked down 2 weeks before we did, we'd be only two weeks away from opening, because we'd have two weeks at least off the duration, plus we'd be two weeks further in.
sam adams Member	Mon May 11 16:24:33 "but there's no reason we needed to waste the first 8 weeks" Yet you did. You cant play wishful thinking make believe.
Dakyron Member	Mon May 11 16:31:36 Fitting that Seb works for the government. "When will this project be done?" - 4 weeks. 8 weeks later... "Why isn't this done yet?" - I told you it would be 8 weeks. "So its been 8 weeks, is it done?" - No, I clearly told you it would be 8 weeks from today.
sam adams Member	Mon May 11 16:32:49 "You can't pin on me the consequences" Of course we can. You are a bungling government functionary of a state with a lousy corona response. Guilt by association.
sam adams Member	Mon May 11 16:34:01 " Dakyron Member Mon May 11 16:31:36 Fitting that Seb works for the government. "When will this project be done?" - 4 weeks. 8 weeks later... "Why isn't this done yet?" - I told you it would be 8 weeks. "So its been 8 weeks, is it done?" - No, I clearly told you it would be 8 weeks from today. " Lol truth!
Dakyron Member	Mon May 11 16:34:02 "Yes. Like in enormously cold, wet Iran in Brazil. " So then explain the difference. Why is it widespread there but not here in the incompetent United States? "New York population density is about 28,000 per sq mile, phoenix is about 3000. " Exactly, that is the point. There is no need for the vast majority of the US to remain in lockdown since only small pockets have that kind of population density.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 18:49:40 Sam: I didn't. I said we should lock down two weeks before the UK govt did. Given this is about what I called for, we should probably go with what I called for, not what the govt did.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 18:51:43 Dakyron: Except I very clearly said 8 weeks from what was it, last week, based on where we were then. So it's disingenuous to say that is the same as calling for a 16 week lockdown when it is quite clear if we'd done what I said back in early March, it would have been considerably less.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 18:52:13 Sam: As I mentioned, I haven't worked for the govt for two years.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 19:01:06 Dakyron: I already have done. You didn't understand it then, its probably not going to help to explain again, but can we addy least agree that as the virus does perfectly well in hot sunny places, a change in seasons isn't alone going to keep a lid on it. And can we also agree that while Brazil is doing badly, its still not doing as badly as the US. "Exactly, that is the point" Then when I pointed out that Arizona has conditions that keep the rate at around 1, but that means without a solid plan for national test and trace, that places like Arizona would reinfect places like New York unless they remained lockdown, why did you start ranting that Pheonix was comparable to new York and not cowboys riding around? Unless a consistent national approach is taken, then areas where r is low will act as reservoirs that will pose a risk to the big dense urban areas, and your economy will still be trashed. This is not a complicated idea dakyron.
Seb Member	Mon May 11 19:03:19 Dakyron has cabin fever.
sam adams Member	Mon May 11 20:38:10 "I said we should lock down two weeks before the UK govt did." Right. Just like you claimed that irans shootdown was probably engine failure and then changed your mind after iran admitted it and claimed you knew it was a missile all along. Even in the very unlikely event you ever do get a prediction right, no one will listen to you because of your neverending record of prior bungling and lies.
sam adams Member	Mon May 11 20:39:51 "As I mentioned, I haven't worked for the govt for two years." Failed out of that too, eh?
Seb Member	Tue May 12 02:30:42 Sam: Not exactly. I doubled my salary, and still get to do a similar job with the govt as a client occasionally. You can call that failure if you want. I can't help it if you are too stupid to understand simple sentences and nuance Sam.
Dakyron Member	Tue May 12 10:18:46 "Except I very clearly said 8 weeks from what was it, last week, based on where we were then. " Which would be 16 weeks total. You also claimed in this thread that it was a total of 4 weeks, a total of 4-6 weeks, a total of 4-8 weeks, and a total of 8 weeks. It has been 8 weeks + this week, so you clearly, unequivocally called for a 16 week lockdown. Thanks for playing. "As I mentioned, I haven't worked for the govt for two years." I'm sorry they had to let you go. I'm sure you will find something soon. "but can we addy least agree that as the virus does perfectly well in hot sunny places, a change in seasons isn't alone going to keep a lid on it. And can we also agree that while Brazil is doing badly, its still not doing as badly as the US. " Depends on where in the US, for the umpteenth time. "Then when I pointed out that Arizona has conditions that keep the rate at around 1, but that means without a solid plan for national test and trace, that places like Arizona would reinfect places like New York unless they remained lockdown, why did you start ranting that Pheonix was comparable to new York and not cowboys riding around? " So... let me understand. Phoenix has to stay in lockdown, with everyone in their homes all day because New York, which is 3K+ miles away, doesn't want to get reinfected by someone traveling from a place where COVID-19 is uncommon. Is this correct? "Unless a consistent national approach is taken, then areas where r is low will act as reservoirs that will pose a risk to the big dense urban areas, and your economy will still be trashed. This is not a complicated idea dakyron. " Impose quarantines on travelers then. No reason to force suburbanites into lockdown indefinitely. "Not exactly. I doubled my salary, and still get to do a similar job with the govt as a client occasionally. You can call that failure if you want. " So your salary is almost to market rate then, if you were working for the gov't.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue May 12 11:28:22 It is obvious seb is talking about what we should have done for minimum pain and loss. However many weeks, all those bets are off now, US, UK and Sweden have all failed in that regard. It can not be said any more clearly than go hard ho early or go home.
sam adams Member	Tue May 12 11:45:59 Right. At this point, lockdown until the vaccine looks like it will do more harm than the virus will. So open back up.
Seb Member	Tue May 12 16:42:59 Dakyron: You need to calm down and read carefully. 1. Nimatzo iChihuaha Mon May 11 02:04:07 ”Everyone stay home for 2-4 weeks.” -seb 2. Seb Member Mon May 11 04:41:39 Nim: I think it was 4-8 weeks to be fair. But yeah, we are talking about a matter of weeks to get the infrastructure in place. "You also claimed in this thread that it was a total of 4 weeks, a total of 4-6 weeks, a total of 4-8 weeks, and a total of 8 weeks. It has been 8 weeks + this week" No, I think you are confused by how many *more* weeks now are needed (which depends on where a country is), how many *more* weeks were needed at the time of the last thread; and "total" lockdown, a duration I've never called for on this site for the obvious reason it is meaningless (it depends on the policy you have going in and the state of your country going in to the decision point, which is long past) but which you are attempting to attribute to me in a fit of emotional rage because you don't like lockdown. One must be rational about these things. I haven't "called" for a 16 week lockdown. To call for a 16 week lockdown would imply I agreed with the decision to delay lockdown to the point that the present need to hold on for another 6 to 8 weeks became necessary. I hope you all understand this point and are just engaging in performative contrarinism, if not, all hope is lost for you.
Seb Member	Tue May 12 17:00:39 Dakyron: "I'm sorry they had to let you go. I'm sure you will find something soon" Haha, not quite how it happened, but if it makes you feel better to think so! "Depends on where in the US, for the umpteenth time" Depends on where in every country thats more than a few million people. And ultimately the economy is connected, Arizona won't be doing well if the major cities across the country are repeatedly going into lockdown. "... let me understand. Phoenix has to stay in lockdown, with everyone in their homes all day because New York, which is 3K+ miles away, doesn't want to get reinfected by someone traveling from a place where COVID-19 is uncommon. Is this correct?" *Sigh*. No dakyron. I don't know how many fucking times I need to say track and trace, consistent national policy etc. This doesn't mean you need to lock down everywhere and everything, but "each state decided their own thing" won't work for an economic recovery. In any case the issue far more is the political pressure Trump appears to be putting on all stares to lift lockdown uniformly, not lockdown States that aren't. You seem determined to have a fight with an imagined demon. Calm down dear. "So your salary is almost to market rate then, if you were working for the gov't." Depends if you are counting the defined benefit pension in terms of equivalent salary needed to secure an equivalent estimated benefit with defined contribution. Market rate is whatever you can charge, so naturally I'm market rate, for a top tier firm. Let's say, we are reassuringly expensive and when we are engaged, we get an extremely fast response from the client.
Seb Member	Tue May 12 17:02:04 Sam: Nobody is talking lock down to vaccine. It's like saying leaving lockdown means everyone go lick each other. Do you have to be so boring Sam?
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed May 13 07:30:09 Right, as I tried to recap for Rugian "No one thinks the lockdown should go on forever, that extreme does not exist, period." Is this the hill of strawmen the anti lock down peeps want to die on?
Pillz Member	Wed May 13 10:31:54 No lockdown should have occurred to begin with. Youre looking at a virus that presents symptoms in less than 10% of infected, and kills a miniscule percent of those with symptoms. A proper, war time effort to shore up the healthcare system in the short term was all that was needed. Somehow nobody is really successful there - I mean forgetting that Québec managed to build capacity for several thousand patients in February/March... Buildings now going unused while we mix corona and non corona medical care together in urban hospitals... The political and medical establishments wanted this to be there big time to shine. Politicians made calls to save millions of lives, and the medical sector gets more funding and climate-change like public fervor against infectious diseases. And in doing so they ignored practical solutions, exacerbating the issue and creating massive damage to the economy and liberty alike.
jergul large member	Wed May 13 10:37:05 Pillz Lockdown is the only reasonable response until we have enough information to gauge how dangerous an endemic epidemic might be. We know what we need to have in place to end lock downs and this is as good a time as any to get them in place. Covid-19 is not really a black swan event. It is a precusor of what we will have to deal with regularly. Best now to get the procedures in place so we are ready for the next time. Be it a 2nd wave come fall, or something different in a few years time.
Seb Member	Wed May 13 10:56:56 Pillz: Giving a movel virus a huge population to mutate in because you think it's not lethal isn't the wisest idea. Particularly as some viruses can do easy horizontal gene transfer. If someone gets MERS / SARS and CV at the same time, you might find yourself with something with lethality of the former and the ability to spread of the latter. In any case, given the huge number of deaths we've had in the US and UK, with likely a relatively small proportion of people infected, I don't think you can simply say "eh, no lockdown, 4-8% of over 60s can die". Those odds are bad enough that the economy crashes anyway in the West. Those demographics are a huge chunk of demand.
Pillz Member	Wed May 13 11:13:03 There hasn't been a serious pandemic in a century. But yeah this is obviously a prophetic sign that the end is nigh and plagues will now descend upon us regularly (from China). Lol And SARS is a dead virus. I suspect the Saudi and UAE response to Corona being so strong is related to their experience with MERS. But they also have a society that's easy to shutdown and they've done a good job controlling the spread. Inb4 jergul praises collectivism and totalitarianism and theocracies And again, no lockdown does not mean we let seniors go about life normally. Ive been suggesting early retirement and corona-financial support to let them ride this out in isolation. Why are we treating corona positive patients in nursing and retirement homes? Why not transport them. Of course you have die offs in nursing homes when they just decide 'it's to dangerous to transport them'. And treat corona and non corona patients in the same hospitals and even the same wings. This is not due to a lack of preparation in some cases, and everyone had the time to plan and at least attempt to implement a top down isolation strategy. Separate staff corona and none corona patients, etc. So far as I can tell everyone failed miserably at this. And for no reason. We emptied hospitals in February and March of everyone who could be released. There are no surgeries and procedures. Hospital visits are down. The # of people hospitalized by the virus is not overwhelming for the system. The political and medical establishments were too busy salivating over an apocalypse to boost their ambitions and the foundation of any response was never laid.
jergul large member	Wed May 13 11:25:28 Pillz We have had 4 outbreaks so far this century. Blind luck is not something that will keep us safe forever. Ultimately, its all about greater overlaps of viral pools with humans that have potential to infect. Compounded by most of you being wheezing fat-asses that feed drug resistance every time you get a mild infection. Just wait until you also are old. There are in other words lots of comorbidity factors that were not in earnest play even as late as when we all started posting here.
Sam Adams Member	Wed May 13 11:54:02 "Those demographics are a huge chunk of demand." But not all of the demand.
Dakyron Member	Wed May 13 12:29:03 "*Sigh*. No dakyron. I don't know how many fucking times I need to say track and trace, consistent national policy etc. This doesn't mean you need to lock down everywhere and everything, but "each state decided their own thing" won't work for an economic recovery. In any case the issue far more is the political pressure Trump appears to be putting on all stares to lift lockdown uniformly, not lockdown States that aren't. " track and trace has proven ineffective with COVID-19.
jergul large member	Wed May 13 14:37:33 Daky How do you figure? It has been singularily effective in China. But you do need boots on the ground. T&T is incredibly labour intensive.
hood Member	Wed May 13 15:00:53 "T&T is incredibly labour intensive." Que? Push plunge, watch explosion! "Youre looking at a virus that presents symptoms in less than 10% of infected, and kills a miniscule percent of those with symptoms." Gonna need a source for the first bit and a crowbar to the face for the second.
Dakyron Member	Wed May 13 16:34:54 "How do you figure? It has been singularily effective in China. But you do need boots on the ground. T&T is incredibly labour intensive. " Wuhan just had a handful of new cases after weeks without a single case. And that is in the authoritarian dreamworld where they install cameras inside your shitholes to monitor you and impose 14 day quarantines for any newcomers. And of course, if track and trace were effective, the contagion would not have spread so far so fast. hood - You are talking like 0.5% of symptomatic people are killed. Although even survivors of COVID-19 have reported long-term health effects like lung scarring, lack of taste/smell, etc... Most of that is anecdotal due to lack of real research on recovered patients.
Seb Member	Wed May 13 16:52:34 Sam: Lockdown doesn't suppress all of demand either. The difference is a well orchestrated lockdown can lead to a short v shaped recession with little damage to employment and most demand simply deferred for a few weeks. No lockdown or a badly exited lockdown will lead to lots of permanent job losses due to long term collapse in demand. So I tend to think pillz and your view here, which is to accept that the over 60s take what is actually a very high risk of death - particularly given the income and wealth distribution - is not such a great idea. The over 60s dissapear, their demand drops away, leading to redundancies in industries their demand sustained, further reducing demand etc. etc. The fact your govt (and mine) has cocked up a perfectly easy policy by not entering lockdown early enough - this increasing the needed duration - and failing to build track and trace capability during the lockdown period, then exiting far too early to be in a position to control the disease, isn't a compelling argument for anything more than their own incompetence.
Seb Member	Wed May 13 16:53:37 Dakyron: Yes, track and trace is ineffective... Have you looked at South Korea?
Seb Member	Wed May 13 16:54:41 Dakyron: I've posted sourced figures for infection rate fatality. You keep saying 0.5% without source.
jergul large member	Wed May 13 17:58:33 Daky Track and trace works poorly if done poorly. It was key to China managing the outbreak.
Pillz Member	Thu May 14 05:26:48 Welding an entire city inside their homes obviously was not a key factor
jergul large member	Thu May 14 05:32:37 Pillz Not the entire city. Only those tracked, traced, and at risk of not complying with stay at home orders. You seem to not grasp that track and tracing replaces shut downs as surgical way of keeping R low. Ideally, only those infected need to practice social distancing. Track and tracing is a means of moving closer to the ideal.
Seb Member	Thu May 14 06:58:15 The Roche test is something of a game changer. 100% specific! Nice. We can work out who may have temporary immunity. Though of course we don't know how long that lasts, but it gives a way to loosen lockdown and work out how much of the population is affected. However, there's still an issue in that it doesn't let you take the economy out of deep freeze, as that needs to be done synchronously.
jergul large member	Thu May 14 07:03:36 I don't think there is any ethical way to confirm immunity.
sam adams Member	Thu May 14 09:51:21 "You keep saying 0.5% without source." The case fatality rate is indeed around 0.5%. It is no surprise you are confused by this though, and need your hand held.
Seb Member	Thu May 14 09:51:41 Jergul: For coronaviruses, the issue is the body stops producing antibodies after a while, something to do with memory B cells. I've forgotten how that works, but should show up in antibody titres. There's also mutation, of course, but loss of immunity to a given strain can be measured with blood tests.
sam adams Member	Thu May 14 09:52:39 "I don't think there is any ethical way to confirm immunity." Testing on properly convicted prisoners should be ethical.
Seb Member	Thu May 14 09:58:04 Sam: CFR isn't that useful. The rest denominator is confirmed cases, so you inflate because of under testing asymptomatic, and deflate due to deaths not correctly attributed. I've posted two Sources that give estimates for IFR, which is what matters. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/coronavirus-cfr?country=ITA+KOR+OWID_WRL+DEU+ISL+USA World CFR is 7% and US at 6% using actuals in the link above. I suspect you are using an estimate of total infected rather than confirmed, but that would then be a (bad) estimate of IFR, not CFR. Given you aren't known for clearly or accurately citing things in the past,
sam adams Member	Thu May 14 10:13:33 "I suspect you are using an estimate of total infected rather than confirmed" That is part of it. Also the confirmed cfr in specific enclosed small populations. it is all in good agreement around 0.5%. But even basic stats are beyond your ability, so im not going to waste my time with you going into detail.
Seb Member	Thu May 14 10:19:04 Sam Adams; Cite a source then.
Seb Member	Thu May 14 10:19:33 Also if you are using total infected, that's IFR not CFR
sam adams Member	Thu May 14 10:30:26 After 2+ months of this seb you still dont know the fatality rate? Pathetic, but unsurprising.
Dakyron Member	Thu May 14 11:06:49 Track and trace cannot be done effectively in a civilized country. It worked in China because they installed cameras at your home, sometimes inside your home, and if you disobeyed you and your family would disappear. You cannot do that in the US or other western countries. Also, maybe Seb is pushing so hard for a continued lockdown because he cannot understand statistics and thus thinks the virus is 14 times more deadly than it really is?
jergul large member	Thu May 14 11:25:49 Daky That is not track and trace. That is enforcing quaratine. Tracking and tracing is very labour intensive. That is the main barrier in western economies. Ideally, startups would have geared up with some free market track and tracers to win some government contracts that would emerge the moment some company suggested they had the capacity. I am actually surprised the invisible hand failed to do that.
sam adams Member	Thu May 14 12:28:28 The phone contact tracing method is trivial. I could code that in 4 minutes, as could five hundred thousand other dudes. But getting the personal location of each phone and their covid status is a major privacy concern and thus a hopeless wall of red tape.
hood Member	Thu May 14 13:55:03 Track and trace can also be a simple a series of interviews. "Where were you on Saturday? You went to the gym? Anywhere else? Just the gym? Ok." Now you interview the gym and track all the people that might have come into contact with the infected person and trace those leads. One doesn't need detailed camera systems, just a throng of interviewers and testers to identify potential branches of infection vectors.
sam adams Member	Thu May 14 14:08:15 Phones are so much simpler. But ethics.
Dakyron Member	Thu May 14 14:09:45 jergul - if you do not enforce the quarantine, then track and trace is ineffective, no? "But getting the personal location of each phone and their covid status is a major privacy concern and thus a hopeless wall of red tape. " And completely unconstitutional. Something China and other shitholes have not had to worry about. "One doesn't need detailed camera systems, just a throng of interviewers and testers to identify potential branches of infection vectors. " And when those people just ignore their quarantine orders?
Dakyron Member	Thu May 14 14:10:22 FFS, the goddamn governor of New York ignored his own quarantine order, so why would you expect anyone else to follow through?
	show deleted posts