Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Sat Jul 11 12:54:45 2020

Utopia Talk / Politics / UK passes italy death rate
sam adams
Member
Sat May 23 12:30:26
Congrats seb!
Habebe
Member
Sat May 23 12:46:55
http://youtu.be/rX7wtNOkuHo
Seb
Member
Sat May 23 16:51:07
Yup, it is a disaster. Yet strangely Sam, you keep espousing the policies they are enacting!
Seb
Member
Sun May 24 04:15:37
It's almost like the US and UK are a worked experiment of Sam-ist govt.

Germany is the control.
jergul
large member
Sun May 24 04:33:27
Seb
Well, small government afficiendos need new role models not that Somalia got its act together.
jergul
large member
Sun May 24 04:33:41
now that*
jergul
large member
Sun May 24 04:34:10
Samalia should be a thing :D
Rugian
Member
Sun May 24 04:40:48
There's no way the UK's response to Covid can be considered a small government approach.
Habebe
Member
Sun May 24 05:31:51
I don't know that I would want a small government response to this anymore than I would in matters of war.
Pillz
Member
Sun May 24 05:44:27
Europeans can't come to terms with the fact that their healthcare systems are 1) shit 2) lack capacity and 3) Europeans are pussies and cowards who run away from their jobs and let seniors die


But it's okay because at least they're very diverse with merkels million afghans
jergul
large member
Sun May 24 06:17:26
I have changed my mind. Samolia should be a thing :D.
EuropeanPussy
Member
Sun May 24 06:24:45
Wait, wait, Italy could still win:

http://www...-000-to-italian-toll-sg0lqwhpq

May 23 2020

Italy’s coronavirus death toll for the months of March and April has been estimated at 47,000, an increase of almost 19,000 on official government figures.

The national social security institute (INPS) said that excess deaths compared with the average for the past five years amounted to 46,909 in the two months in which the pandemic took hold in Italy. The figure represents an increase of 18,971 on the death toll of 27,938 recorded by the civil protection agency in March and April.
Dakyron
Member
Sun May 24 11:51:09
Seb and jergul prefer the authoritarian fascist policies of China?

Live free or die. People are taking that phrase literally with COVID-19.
jergul
large member
Sun May 24 13:03:35
Daky
Its more that I fail to see why it should be a factor for trade.

I give all kinds of passes to states that do things I dislike - and I weight what states to do other states more heavily than internal affairs.

After all, if people don't like their regime, then they should change it. Entirely their business.

Its a bigger deal with policy outreach like invasions and occupations.
Seb
Member
Sun May 24 16:00:49
Dakyron:

Isn't the point that it's the other way around?

Freedom to slam spread a pandemic doesn't stand up on philosophical grounds.
Dukhat
Member
Sun May 24 19:07:56
Dak is confused by how the real world works so instead of educating himself he falls back on simple mantras. 10 to 1 he votes Trump this fall after the republicans run some stupid ad about how Biden wrote a law that made people that scream fire in a theater liable.

Muh free speech/gunz/bullshit-pet-issue!111
sam adams
Member
Sun May 24 22:40:54

"Freedom to slam spread a pandemic doesn't stand up on philosophical grounds."

It does once it becomes obvious the quarantine is doing more damage than the virus could even if allowed to spread.
sam adams
Member
Sun May 24 22:43:29
But thats some good news for countries like the UK that utterly failed so badly at first... some 10% of your people have been infected... only 60 or so more to go!
Dukhat
Member
Sun May 24 23:41:23
They went for herd immunity but then realized that even 10% of the population getting infected collapses the medical system for weeks.

The US and Brazil will be testing this theory out in future weeks too. Red States blazing a trail of death and destruction like always.
Seb
Member
Mon May 25 02:34:24
Sam:

That's far from obvious.

You should talk about failure when you actually get your death rate below 1000 a day Sam.
Pillz
Member
Mon May 25 05:39:53
The only healthcare systems to collapse were those that were terrible to begin with. Like Italy and Spain and France.

Not enough hospitals, not enough beds, and European work ethic lends itself to abandoning your responsibilities and ditching hundreds of elderly people to die.

Canada & Sweden haven't had their systems overloaded.

1/4 of all Canadian cases are in Montreal and were fine as far as capacity goes. The issue is they have no space specifically for corona victims and have still made no substantial efforts to segregate corona and non corona patients into different facilities - except to send them all to the same 3 hospitals. So those are overcrowded. But we're using less than a quarter of potential space in reality.
sam adams
Member
Mon May 25 10:52:15
"Red States blazing a trail of death and destruction like always."

Yet the highest death tolls by far are blue states. Cuckhat why do you get the simplest shit wrong?

"That's far from obvious."

Oh ya, i forgot you suck at math.
Seb
Member
Mon May 25 14:28:27
Itlay, Spain and France hospital beds per capita (2017):


France 5.98/1k
Italy: 3.18/1k
Spain: 2.97/1k
USA: 2.77/1k (2016 figure, no 2017 figure available)



Seb
Member
Mon May 25 14:29:24
Sam, just a note, that's mean, not median. I know you sometimes thing "Per Capita" without qualification means Median.
Seb
Member
Mon May 25 14:31:35
Canadian beds per capita:
2.52/1k
Sweden beds per capita:
2.22/1k

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_hospital_beds
Seb
Member
Mon May 25 14:31:49
You think maybe local numbers of cases matters?
Pillz
Member
Mon May 25 15:41:39
Not at all.
sam adams
Member
Mon May 25 15:57:22
"know you sometimes thing "Per Capita" without qualification means Median."

The source specifically stated median. In addition to being bad at math, you are likewise bad at reading.

The result of lower brain function in a decaying nation, no doubt.
sam adams
Member
Mon May 25 15:59:20
Not all hospital beds are equal. A bed in a third world location like london, alabama, or italy is not the equal of a high tech location, like tokyo or boston.
Seb
Member
Mon May 25 16:26:35
You didn't post a source, and you quoted it simply as "per capita", whereas the source described it as "Median per capita".

So clearly you think "per capita", on it's own, can imply median. I thought it worthwhile to make sure you were clear Sam.
Seb
Member
Mon May 25 16:28:25
Hospital beds for OECD purposes follow a standard, so no Sam, for the OECD stats, hospital beds are equivalent. That's why we have international statistics organisations who would not bother compiling stats if they were not equivalent.
Seb
Member
Mon May 25 16:29:53
Making it up as he goes along, again. Bluster bluster bluster.
sam adams
Member
Mon May 25 20:09:46
"whereas the source described it as "Median per capita""

It took you 5 months to learn that median could be a thing. Congrats on finally getting it though.

"Hospital beds for OECD purposes follow a standard"

Yes, and your standard method of counting means nothing to some poor londoner dieing in your shithole of incompetence and dunces.
Pillz
Member
Mon May 25 21:28:26
I guess the only logical explanation left is that Europeans are just weak, and die easily.
jergul
large member
Tue May 26 01:11:58
So Norwegians are strong and Die Hard.
jergul
large member
Tue May 26 01:14:24
Broad spectrum anti-biotic use is down 67% first quarter in Norway. Turns out social distancing and other stuff completely fucks up the spread of everything from lice to HIV.

In Norway.
Seb
Member
Tue May 26 02:26:36
Sam:

You posted a figure for what you meant to be UK median income that was flat our wrong. The UK median personal income was significantly higher than Alabama. And if you meant median per capita, you should have said "median per capita", as your source did. Not "per capita".

https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/3b4fdbf2-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/3b4fdbf2-en

US has pretty appalling mortality from avoidable and preventable causes. Yeah, your healthcare system is great. Work hard and maybe you'll best Costa Rica, that all known developed country.
Seb
Member
Tue May 26 02:27:37
*Preventable and treatable.
Pillz
Member
Tue May 26 05:33:17
Still doing better than Europe
Seb
Member
Tue May 26 06:58:20
Pillz:

Only if you keep doing this stupid deaths per-capita thing which is meaningless. The diseased propagates in clusters by physical network, not by national geographical boundary.

Seb
Member
Tue May 26 06:59:21
In any case, if we are taking even the Schengen countries as a whole, US death per capita is probably higher, not lower.
Pillz
Member
Tue May 26 09:31:05
It is still lower than Europe's.
jergul
large member
Tue May 26 09:45:59
"still" being the operative word.
sam adams
Member
Tue May 26 09:53:23
"And if you meant median per capita, you should have said "median per capita""

You were told exactly this in december and a large number of times since. You just got it. 5 months later. IQ = 80?

"
Only if you keep doing this stupid deaths per-capita"


Ok so i guess if we are ignoring population then this is valid.
UK deaths from corona: 37,048
Alabama: 566

http://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

Lol seb you utter dunce
sam adams
Member
Tue May 26 09:56:12
Note if you use the per capita figure the uk still loses by a factor of 5 to alabama.

Lol
Pillz
Member
Tue May 26 11:23:12
Well temperatures in Montreal sky rocketed.

Summer is here, time to test seasonality.
Habebe
Member
Tue May 26 11:25:10
Ive always wanted to visit Canada. Like a trip to go camping and fishing.
sam adams
Member
Tue May 26 16:14:51
http://twi...tatus/1264695063965302784?s=20

Relevent.
Seb
Member
Tue May 26 16:46:44
Sam:

I keep saying it because it's still true. You took a long time to say Median, and keep saying I "incorrectly compared" etc., even though you didn't clarify your position, and you still haven't fessed up to why you used a completely erroneous figure for UK median personal income, when the real figures shows the UK median personal income was significantly larger than Alabama, a fact you continue to claim even though it is demonstrably untrue.

Alabama: population 4m
London: Population 9m

By this metric, Berewick-on-Tweed has got the whole US licked!

Seb
Member
Tue May 26 16:47:20
Sam: "Note if you use the per capita figure the uk still loses by a factor of 5 to alabama."

Might as well be using the metric of cases per sheep owned in country.
sam adams
Member
Tue May 26 19:37:18
"when the real figures shows the UK median personal income was significantly larger than Alabama"

Wrong again. The uk median numbers are a few thousand higher, the uk mean numbers are a few thousand lower. In conclusion, the uk=alabama.

Lol dunce
sam adams
Member
Tue May 26 19:42:33
"Alabama: population 4m
London: Population 9m"

Wait but you just said for the last two months that we cannot control for population when discussing virus deaths. And now you want to. Now do you realize how stupid you sounded that entire time?

The time it takes you to learn from simple mistakes is horrifically long.
sam adams
Member
Tue May 26 22:38:52
I love how you thougtlessly walked right into that trap. Like a roman consul at cannae wondering why the carthaginian center is withdrawing, or admiral scheer at jutland wondering why the fleeing british squadron is not fleeing towards britain... you can see the confusion turning - pathetically slowly - into shocked realization.
Nekran
Member
Wed May 27 04:19:45
Those lines remind me of the description of how you got whooped by addie at RTW. Good old days.
Seb
Member
Wed May 27 04:31:09
Sam:

The figure you posted for 2017 Albaman median income:

The actual UK median income 2017 was £28k for full time employees and £25k for all employees. You had £21k.

In nominal USD, that means $33.9k

You have never provided a source for your £21k, but if it was median UK personal income, you would have to go back many years.


"Wait but you just said for the last two months that we cannot control for population when discussing virus deaths."

I said national populations were a useless metric because the disease spreads in clusters based on the physical network of contacts between people. London is a from an epidemiological perspective, a single place due to the connectivity. I'm not sure Alabama is even a single place at all, but even if it were, and it's spread were to be an equal portion of London, it would be less. But it would be obviously stupid to think that if say, 10% of London caught the disease, and 1% of that 10% died, this would ipso-facto mean it is reasonable to assume 10% of the entire US would catch the disease. For 10% of the entire US to catch the disease, the US would have to be doing much, much, much worse for than the UK at handling the disease. It would have to be actively *trying* to infect people in non-urban centres

Appreciate we've gone a level down to a very shallow understanding that nevertheless an ocean depth compared to the thin veneer you operate at.

Countries like Belgium that are a tightly integrated network with a few contact steps allowing the virus to reach the full population will have huge per capita ratings.

Countries with sparse networks will have low per capita ratings.

And countries like the US with a mix can have outbreaks which, taken on their own, can be the worst in the world in terms of rate of growth and how many people within the locality are affected, but look great from a per capita perspective because the disease doesn't/hasn't yet reached other parts of the country and there are parts of the country that it will never do well in because the sparse network of contacts prevents it from spreading.

The most effective cross country comparisons are in terms of rate of growth of the disease.

This is why UK, France, US, Italy and Spain all have similar growth trajectories from the day after the first 30 deaths. Despite gross national level differencces in demographics, where the disease is actually spreading in all those countries, the demographics are actually very similar. So normalising by the rest of the country tells you nothing.

The only thing that really effects the total deaths in these large developed countries, beyond age/comorbidity demographics, is when the country stops exponential growth phase, which is basically "two weeks after you lockdown", which is again, abundantly clear in all graphs.

The idea that somehow the US has both the fastest rate of increase in deaths during the exponential phase for the longest period of any country, and the slowest decline in daily deaths of any developed country, it is doing well, is clearly absurd.

You have multiple major outbreaks, they are not being well managed, and it is still spreading geographically with some states spiking.

This really isn't hard Sam.

And if you think that is a trap, it shows just how piss poor your understanding of the underlying mechanisms are.
sam adams
Member
Wed May 27 10:14:37
Thats a lot of BS for "i tried to avoid controlling for population size because it made us look bad until the moment sam made us look worse and then i immediatly wanted to control for population again".

Lol dunce.
Seb
Member
Wed May 27 11:59:45
Sam:

It's really sad you don't understand why national population size isn't the thing to control for.

I explained all this from the get go, and why the only meaningful KPI is daily deaths after a fixed threshold (e.g. the first day 30 deaths recorded).

You evidently didn't understand then and do not understand why now.
Seb
Member
Wed May 27 12:03:57
You really need to start using your brain rather than relying on your flawed institution.
sam adams
Member
Wed May 27 14:36:21

"It's really sad you don't understand why national population size isn't the thing to control for."

Then why did you try to control for population size when i compared alabama to the uk?

Lol pwnt.
sam adams
Member
Wed May 27 14:39:32
Its hilarious that you got tricked into doing the thing you said i couldnt do.
Seb
Member
Wed May 27 17:11:52
Sam:

Why do you think I used London rather than UK? Why do you think I keep specifically saying national population size is the wrong basis?

I already answered the question explicitly on the 11th line of my post at 4:31.

Are you just too stupid to understand?
Seb
Member
Wed May 27 17:15:45
Sam, as I said, if you think that was a trap, that's just sad. And if you think about it, and ponder for a fraction of a second why I decided to respond to your comparison of UK death rates to Alabama by comparing the population of *London* to Alabama rather than the UK (as you used) you'll realise just how sad an attempt at a trap it was.

Seb
Member
Wed May 27 17:18:51
This is like when you play games with a toddler.
Seb
Member
Wed May 27 17:20:39
Sam, do you expect every town in the US to have proportionately the same level of cases per capita?
sam adams
Member
Thu May 28 00:59:57
"Why do you think I used London rather than UK? Why do you think I keep specifically saying national population size is the wrong basis?"

Illogical incoherent reasons no doubt.

Who cares what subset of the population you use? Most of the uk is worse off than most of the us, no matter what you pick.

And of course i fully expect more uk-like areas (dumber and more crowded) of the us to be worse off than more intelligent and lower density locations.
Seb
Member
Thu May 28 02:40:50
Sam, are you honestly too stupid to recognise your premise being rejected and side-stepped, so instead you are going to just, pretend?

"Is your fridge running"
"It's switched on"
"Er, well, you better catch it then"

This is Sam, plowing ahead.

"Who cares what subset of the population you use?"
Maybe units congruent to the procession of the disease and this have some kind of physical basis, instead of bashing two numbers together like a chimp bashing rocks together Sam?

"more intelligent and lower density locations"

Yes, quite: the countryside has long been associated with higher intelligence, sophistication etc. This is why we have phrases like county bumpkin and village idiot, and the terms civilisation and politics is derived from the words for city.

Inbreeding would certainly explain a lot about you Sam.

Seb
Member
Thu May 28 02:42:05
But back to the main point, jergul would never have failed to notice the screamingly obvious switch and the implication.

You are very boring Sam.
sam adams
Member
Thu May 28 11:14:56
"some kind of physical basis"

You wishing to avoid looking bad is a basis, though certainly not a physical one. Your illogical and incoherent attempts to avoid using the most direct numbers to try to weasle out of responsiblity is funny to watch.

"the countryside has long been associated with higher intelligence, sophistication"

In the modern world your inner cities are the least intelligent locations, the farming redneck regions are also relatively low iq. It is suburbs and resort-countryside areas that accumulate the most intelligent folks.
sam adams
Member
Thu May 28 11:16:39
"jergul would never have failed to notice the screamingly obvious switch and the implication."

Rofl. So much lol with this one. Oh where to begin...
jergul
large member
Thu May 28 11:38:31
Begin anywhere and you walked into an obvious trap Seb set for you.
Seb
Member
Thu May 28 11:54:08
Sam:

Your wishing to look bad is why you obsess about per capita, because on any objective basis, the US position is the worst in the world. It had the fastest growing rate of daily deaths (something independent of total population), it had the longest period of growth in daily deaths (something independent of population), and is having the slowest rate of reduction in daily deaths (something independent of population).


What this shows is the US handled this incredibly badly, and continues to handle this badly.

Even compared to the UK which as followers of the UK news will know continues to be incredibly incompetent, still the US contrives to produce objectively worse outcomes, even if there are lots of places sufficiently isolated (so far) for the virus not to have reached those parts of the country in sufficient quantities to start major outbreaks.


Seb
Member
Thu May 28 11:58:59
Jergul:

I didn't even intend it as a trap. I was simply maintaining consistency and just didn't think I needed to spell out the basis of my answer as I'd already set out in excruciating detail why gross national population isn't a sensible basis, but regional areas with high physical connections are, so I didn't even realise Sam intended his Alabama thing a trap.

It didn't occur to me that he fundamentally never understood the basis of my objection, which is now evidently the case.

This is why it is all so sad.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share