Coronavirus Impact

[ahalpert]

The economists who write for Bloomberg Opinion think that, based on what happened during the 1918 Pandemic, the economy couldn't function during an uncontrolled pandemic even if we reopened it:

"letting people go back to work now wouldn't simply restore the economy to its former health. The disease would come roaring right back. Infections would soar in city after city, overwhelming the health-care system. Mass panic would be enough to keep people huddled in their homes, possibly for months, causing restaurants, stores and other businesses to go bankrupt anyway. The economy would still take a huge hit, but now many more people would die...

...these calculations tend to be very good at estimating economic numbers but bad at anticipating human costs. Even if coronavirus doesn’t kill you, it can do lasting damage to your lungs. This sort of permanent injury could be incorporated into cost-benefit models, but it often isn’t. And then there’s the small but real possibility that if left unchecked, the virus could mutate into a much deadlier form, as the Spanish flu of 1918-19 may have during its catastrophic second wave. Economists have long known that so-called tail risks such as these should loom large in cost-benefit analyses, but somehow this fact rarely makes it into pundits’ back-of-the-envelope calculations.

For all of these reasons, most economists themselves have not been recommending an end to shutdowns. Instead, they have urged the federal government to broaden its economic support for businesses and households...

...If the Trump administration wants to get Americans back to work as quickly as possible, it should focus on developing high-quality testing systems in every city and state during the next month. Otherwise, the country could be in and out of shutdown for a very long time, and the economic collapse will drag on longer than it otherwise would."

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...navirus-lockdown-to-end-by-easter-big-mistake

Even if the Lancet is correct that the fatality rate is "only" 0.66% (which they base on faulty Chinese data), that would amount to over 1 million deaths if half of the US were infected.

 

[OldCorpse]

The authorities made a catastrophic mistake by lying about the masks. I understand that they did it because there was a shortage, so they didn't want to panic people, and also because the masks are needed by healthcare workers, but whatever the intention, it is a devastating mistake. How can anyone now believe anything from the same sources - whether about effectiveness of medication, abatement procedures or anything else? Once you are willing to lie about such life and death issues, your credibility is nil. It will be a long road to gain back that trust, and there should be a full reckoning, and the people responsible should face consequences. Errors like this not only cause loss of trust in authorities - which trust is desperately needed in times of crisis like this - but also cause a loss of social cohesion; now it's up to everyone individually to take care of themselves because it's up to you what measures to take since you can't trust established authorities - everyone will do their own thing.

Speaking just for myself, I couldn't understand how they thought they'd get away with it. It was stupid from the get go - supposedly masks don't work for the public, but somehow at the same time they work for healthcare workers. During the 1918 Spanish Flue, masks were mandatory for all of the public and strictly enforced. It's especially important, because even if you show no symptoms - as many Corona virus carries do - you are lessening the chances of spreading the virus by wearing a mask. This is perhaps a more important aspect of wearing the mask than personal protection - you are protecting others, and preventing the spread of this virus. Besides, one of the most prominent ways of the virus spreading is touching your face, particularly the mouth and nose - by wearing a mask, while f.ex. shopping or out in the public where you might come in contact with the virus, you are less likely to touch your mouth and nose if they are covered by a mask.

And now the CDC is thinking of recommending masks for everyone.

Sadly, whatever comes out now from the authorities will have to be taken with a truckload of salt - what are they saying and why and with what motives and whose interests are they really protecting? Watching the same folks take everything that comes out of China at face value is also dismaying - they are building disease models and containment procedures based on Chinese data that is riddled with corruption and political motivations. Who in their right mind is going to trust any of these graphs and projections?

Trust in times of a crisis is critical. It's tragic to see it squandered so carelessly.

 

[ozmorphasis]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but here is a roadmap for reopening:

https://www.aei.org/research-produc...IbXgsmGOC2Ok5cxGxYo5q2orM9barFJDyWgMYUUF2NIw0

 

[Cary Knoop]

The authorities made a catastrophic mistake by lying about the masks. I understand that they did it because there was a shortage, so they didn't want to panic people, and also because the masks are needed by healthcare workers, but whatever the intention, it is a devastating mistake. How can anyone now believe anything from the same sources - whether about effectiveness of medication, abatement procedures or anything else? Once you are willing to lie about such life and death issues, your credibility is nil. It will be a long road to gain back that trust, and there should be a full reckoning, and the people responsible should face consequences. Errors like this not only cause loss of trust in authorities - which trust is desperately needed in times of crisis like this - but also cause a loss of social cohesion; now it's up to everyone individually to take care of themselves because it's up to you what measures to take since you can't trust established authorities - everyone will do their own thing.

Speaking just for myself, I couldn't understand how they thought they'd get away with it. It was stupid from the get go - supposedly masks don't work for the public, but somehow at the same time they work for healthcare workers. During the 1918 Spanish Flue, masks were mandatory for all of the public and strictly enforced. It's especially important, because even if you show no symptoms - as many Corona virus carries do - you are lessening the chances of spreading the virus by wearing a mask. This is perhaps a more important aspect of wearing the mask than personal protection - you are protecting others, and preventing the spread of this virus. Besides, one of the most prominent ways of the virus spreading is touching your face, particularly the mouth and nose - by wearing a mask, while f.ex. shopping or out in the public where you might come in contact with the virus, you are less likely to touch your mouth and nose if they are covered by a mask.

And now the CDC is thinking of recommending masks for everyone.

Sadly, whatever comes out now from the authorities will have to be taken with a truckload of salt - what are they saying and why and with what motives and whose interests are they really protecting? Watching the same folks take everything that comes out of China at face value is also dismaying - they are building disease models and containment procedures based on Chinese data that is riddled with corruption and political motivations. Who in their right mind is going to trust any of these graphs and projections?

Trust in times of a crisis is critical. It's tragic to see it squandered so carelessly.

The American authorities (and others!) have been downplaying the risk of this virus since the beginning.
But I think now they are about to overreact and attempting to throw away the baby with the bathwater.

 

[puredrifting]

The authorities made a catastrophic mistake by lying about the masks. I understand that they did it because there was a shortage, so they didn't want to panic people, and also because the masks are needed by healthcare workers, but whatever the intention, it is a devastating mistake. How can anyone now believe anything from the same sources - whether about effectiveness of medication, abatement procedures or anything else? Once you are willing to lie about such life and death issues, your credibility is nil. It will be a long road to gain back that trust, and there should be a full reckoning, and the people responsible should face consequences. Errors like this not only cause loss of trust in authorities - which trust is desperately needed in times of crisis like this - but also cause a loss of social cohesion; now it's up to everyone individually to take care of themselves because it's up to you what measures to take since you can't trust established authorities - everyone will do their own thing.

Speaking just for myself, I couldn't understand how they thought they'd get away with it. It was stupid from the get go - supposedly masks don't work for the public, but somehow at the same time they work for healthcare workers. During the 1918 Spanish Flue, masks were mandatory for all of the public and strictly enforced. It's especially important, because even if you show no symptoms - as many Corona virus carries do - you are lessening the chances of spreading the virus by wearing a mask. This is perhaps a more important aspect of wearing the mask than personal protection - you are protecting others, and preventing the spread of this virus. Besides, one of the most prominent ways of the virus spreading is touching your face, particularly the mouth and nose - by wearing a mask, while f.ex. shopping or out in the public where you might come in contact with the virus, you are less likely to touch your mouth and nose if they are covered by a mask.

And now the CDC is thinking of recommending masks for everyone.

Sadly, whatever comes out now from the authorities will have to be taken with a truckload of salt - what are they saying and why and with what motives and whose interests are they really protecting? Watching the same folks take everything that comes out of China at face value is also dismaying - they are building disease models and containment procedures based on Chinese data that is riddled with corruption and political motivations. Who in their right mind is going to trust any of these graphs and projections?

Trust in times of a crisis is critical. It's tragic to see it squandered so carelessly.

Agree on all. But no local sources have them. We can all make them out of Bandanas or paper towels but I question if those are worth the effort?

 

[Cary Knoop]

Agree on all. But no local sources have them.

Not only that, retailers now reserve every prophylactic (gloves, masks, alcohol, peroxide etc) to health and government resources.
That means citizens cannot even protect themselves because soap is not practical when you have to go outside.

 

[Cary Knoop]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but here is a roadmap for reopening:

https://www.aei.org/research-produc...IbXgsmGOC2Ok5cxGxYo5q2orM9barFJDyWgMYUUF2NIw0

I am glad there are people and institutions making plans for reopening our country instead of only hearing "doomsday" scenarios from the mainstream press.

I think Gottlieb is a down to Earth and knowledgable guy!

From the report:

1) Better data to identify areas of spread and the rate of exposure and immunity in the population;
2) Improvements in state and local health care system capabilities, public-health infrastructure for early outbreak identification, case containment, and adequate medical supplies; and
3) Therapeutic, prophylactic, and preventive treatments and better-informed medical interventions that give us the tools to protect the most vulnerable people and help rescue those who may become very sick.


This document is a great antidote to the increasingly "doom and gloom" reporting by the mainstream media.

Another important element that seems to be overseen a lot is viral shedding after a patient is recovered:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2196-x

"Seroconversion occurred after 7 days in 50% of patients (14 days in all), but was not followed by a rapid decline in viral load."

This implies that after a patient is recovered he or she can still infect others. Effective containment strategies should take this into account.

And with respect to the lockdown:

"If we don't develop effective therapeutics by summer and have them ready for fall, much of what we're doing now could be lost as #COVID19 comes back again."

- Scott Gottlieb

 

[ahalpert]

We should have been ramping up production of protective gear in February.

CDC should have recommended universal bandana/scarf wearing. (Masks were being stolen from hospitals even without a CDC recommendation to wear them.)

 

[OldCorpse]

Yes, even a bandana is helpful - it prevents you spraying out droplets during sneezing, coughing etc., and importantly it protects you to a degree, because at least you won't be touching your mouth/nose.

Don't listen to the propaganda telling you it's not effective. It is effective to a degree. Obviously, hypothetically a full hazmat suit would be best, but let's get real - not having a hazmat or a medical grade mask does not mean that lesser measures are useless. If you don't have access to a medical mask, a bandana is better than nothing. Stay safe!

 

[Cary Knoop]

Yes, even a bandana is helpful - it prevents you spraying out droplets during sneezing, coughing etc., and importantly it protects you to a degree, because at least you won't be touching your mouth/nose.

Don't listen to the propaganda telling you it's not effective. It is effective to a degree. Obviously, hypothetically a full hazmat suit would be best, but let's get real - not having a hazmat or a medical grade mask does not mean that lesser measures are useless. If you don't have access to a medical mask, a bandana is better than nothing. Stay safe!

Here is a tip for if you have to go outside in case the infection rate in your neighborhood is very high:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B076ZHMR3S/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Buy it now, while it lasts!

 

[ahalpert]

Lessons from the Spanish flu: social distancing can be good for the economy

https://www.economist.com/graphic-d...social-distancing-can-be-good-for-the-economy

 

[cpreston]

Lessons from the Spanish flu: social distancing can be good for the economy

https://www.economist.com/graphic-d...social-distancing-can-be-good-for-the-economy

The fact that the media is touting that study as evidence is one of the reasons I am losing trust in what I am hearing. The study compares reported manufacturing rates in 1914 and 1919 vs how long a city held onto its social distancing measures. The data is junk and it is a real stretch to believe that the economy in 1918 is at all comparable to the economy today.

 

[ahalpert]

The fact that the media is touting that study as evidence is one of the reasons I am losing trust in what I am hearing. The study compares reported manufacturing rates in 1914 and 1919 vs how long a city held onto its social distancing measures. The data is junk and it is a real stretch to believe that the economy in 1918 is at all comparable to the economy today.

I think the manufacturing data is the best dataset they have available to look at economic rebound post-1918 pandemic.

Find me an economist (not a CEO or financier) who is arguing to reopen the economy now.

The explanation they give for the outcome is that the economy can't run with an unchecked epidemic - too many people will be calling out sick from the workplaces where the virus is spreading.

Commentators mistakenly attribute economic harm to the shutdown measures, but it's the pandemic and NOT the shutdown that is hurting the economy.

 

[Paul F]

I think the manufacturing data is the best dataset they have available to look at economic rebound post-1918 pandemic.

Then you're looking at the wrong data. The data in that chart is from 1914 to 1918. The pandemic was from January 1918 to December 1920. The chart is bunk.

None of the data in that chart is post-pandemic. World War I started in 1914. So the manufacturing includes the years of the war, not the post pandemic years. Strangely enough, unemployment was lowest during the pandemic (see below). Was that due to wartime manufacturing?

Also, the unemployment change over 4 years is mostly in the .2 to .4%. There's only five cities with unemployment improvements over .6%; pretty meaningless change in employment. If you look at the national unemployment rates in those years, they go up and down quite widely (several percentage points). The data from the Bureau of the Budget also shows unemployment skyrocketed after the pandemic and war. And just in case you don't think that article has an agenda, they included Washington D.C. as a manufacturing city.

US Unemployment from a paper written by the Bureau of the Budget, 1954 (est.)

Year Unemployment in thousands
1910 2150
1911 2290
1912 1960
1913 1680
1914 3110
1915 3840
1916 1920
1917 1920
1918 560
1919 950
1920 1670
1921 5010
1922 3220

 

[OldCorpse]

Folks should really be careful and frankly very sceptical of any data that comes out of China, and for that matter any medical equipment coming from China:

European Countries Are Throwing Out ‘Rubbish’ Chinese-Made Masks and Coronavirus Tests

 

[Run&Gun]

Not only that, retailers now reserve every prophylactic (gloves, masks, alcohol, peroxide etc) to health and government resources.
That means citizens cannot even protect themselves because soap is not practical when you have to go outside.

Ran into this yesterday looking for non-existent disinfecting wipes(I knew it was a fools errand, but I've been contacted about a possible job and they brought up having them to wipe gear down). When looking on Amazon and some other places, most have statements that say only for sale to hospitals, etc. Or if not, they didn't know when they'd be available or it would be up to a month before available.

Again, this just shows how vulnerable and fragile our society is. There is no room for disruption in the modern fragile supply chains. And the supply chains and manufacturing facilities are still intact. All it has taken is people buying in excess of their normal consumption and they supply chains can't catch back up.

 

[ahalpert]

Then you're looking at the wrong data. The data in that chart is from 1914 to 1918. The pandemic was from January 1918 to December 1920. The chart is bunk.

None of the data in that chart is post-pandemic. World War I started in 1914. So the manufacturing includes the years of the war, not the post pandemic years. Strangely enough, unemployment was lowest during the pandemic (see below). Was that due to wartime manufacturing?

Also, the unemployment change over 4 years is mostly in the .2 to .4%. There's only five cities with unemployment improvements over .6%; pretty meaningless change in employment. If you look at the national unemployment rates in those years, they go up and down quite widely (several percentage points). The data from the Bureau of the Budget also shows unemployment skyrocketed after the pandemic and war. And just in case you don't think that article has an agenda, they included Washington D.C. as a manufacturing city.

US Unemployment from a paper written by the Bureau of the Budget, 1954 (est.)

Year Unemployment in thousands
1910 2150
1911 2290
1912 1960
1913 1680
1914 3110
1915 3840
1916 1920
1917 1920
1918 560
1919 950
1920 1670
1921 5010
1922 3220

Where are you getting your info? The pandemic finished by spring 1919 and peaked in late 1918. WWI ended in late 1918 and the US entered in 1917. The graph shows employment change between 1914 and 1919.

They don't have data available from every year between 1914 and 1919.

In any case, they are comparing trends between US cities, so any factors that affect the entire country are irrelevant. The question here is how did cities fare economically relative to each other based on how early and long they locked down for. And there is a clear trend indicating that containing the virus also helps the economy in the medium-term.

Sweden, incidentally, is pursuing a herd immunity strategy and still expects its economy to contract as much as it did in the financial crisis. And I would bet that if their planning is based on faulty Chinese data, their outcomes may be even worse than predicted.

 

[Cary Knoop]

Ran into this yesterday looking for non-existent disinfecting wipes(I knew it was a fools errand, but I've been contacted about a possible job and they brought up having them to wipe gear down). When looking on Amazon and some other places, most have statements that say only for sale to hospitals, etc. Or if not, they didn't know when they'd be available or it would be up to a month before available.

Again, this just shows how vulnerable and fragile our society is. There is no room for disruption in the modern fragile supply chains. And the supply chains and manufacturing facilities are still intact. All it has taken is people buying in excess of their normal consumption and they supply chains can't catch back up.

I think that any nation that wants to have a basic level of independence needs to make sure it is producing (or have produced by strategic allies, i.e. Canada, UK etc) strategic goods such as military, medical, aeronautical, computer, communications, and other technology and of course food.

Just see what today is happening with 3M, selling things to foreign bidders, sometimes for cash, pushing USA needs out.
Looks they are now put under the "P Act".

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

FWIW I ordered 4 of these disinfectant wipes and they are still in stock:

https://optimusdentalsupply.com/pdi-super-sani-cloth-30-kill-claims-2-minutes-large-6-x-6-160-canister/

 

[cyvideo]

How can anyone know where this going re projecting how all this will develop if there is any truth in the following.

Chris Young

https://www-businessinsider-com.cdn...ernment-reportedly-furious-with-cfhina-2020-3