Coronavirus Thread

[Techster]

 

[gthxxxx]

Appropriate the money. Look at the federal funds rate. The government of the US can sell any bond it prints in a New York minute at a negative interest rate, when inflation is factored in. Besides, in a recession there are no inflationary pressures. If the last 10 years have taught us anything at all, that's it. The explanation is … well, why listen to me? Goto:

https://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-warns-of-fiscal-time-bomb-if-relief-insufficient-2020-4

And remember Brad DeLong's Krugman Rules:

1. Remember that Paul Krugman is right.

2. If your analysis leads you to conclude that Paul Krugman is wrong, refer to rule 1.

Good advice.

ps: Krugman's concerns about state and local governments letting massive number of employees go is a real one. Back in 2008-9 that was a major problem and it could be again.

There is a thing called stagflation...

Anyways, in the interview Krugman says we got a "$20-trillion-a-year economy," "20, 25% of the economy is going to be shut down for an extended period," the "[disaster relief bill] might end up being $4 trillion or $5 trillion" instead of the "$2 trillion", which is "not enough money"... I'm not sure his math is adding up with reality. The article was written Apr 2, but the month isn't even over yet and the small business funds are (almost?) depleted, the $1200 check is done, the paycheck protection is (almost?) depleted, and I'm not sure what else I'm missing. The going rate looks more like $2 trillion (on the low end) every couple months, so unless he thinks everything's going to be resolved in under a couple more months, I'm not sure how the bill is going to stop at just $4 or $5 trillion. The odds that this year's economy (I'm assuming he means GDP) hitting $20 trillion (or 75% of that) also isn't a sure bet.

Then at the end of the article, he says Denmark's government is doing a good job by picking up 75% of its tab... Something tells me there's a reason why in any previous economic bumps (minor and major) in history, the option of having the government take over the tab was not considered the obvious easy decision, much less purposely shutting down the majority of the economy.

 

[dtm1997]

I believe you live in/near NYC so what you got going on is exponentially different than what I’m experiencing. I feel bad that so many people where you live were led & are continuing to be led in such a poor fashion. Unfortunately for you, staying at home is the most rational choice and hate to say it but you will likely be stuck there for another 6-8 weeks or more. Our prayers are with you!

Correct and thank you.

I have faith in Cuomo leading the state. DeBlasio is a clown though.

I'm fully expecting to be work from home through all of May, but once I get proper masks, I think I'll feel comfortable for walks around the block to be less sedentary.

 

[BuzzStone]

Why? Anybody who thinks they have a reason to be tested can quickly without an appointment set up a web meeting with a healthcare professional to do a screening. If they are showing symptoms or have been around someone who tested positive, or anything like that, they can be approved to go get tested. (And even after all that, we're still running 85%-90% negatives.)

By comparison, Minnesota is about 10% larger by population than we are. They have run 49k tests:
https://www.health.state.mn.us/diseases/coronavirus/situation.html

For reference South Carolina reported 670 test yesterday. I would expect our numbers to keep declining rapidly with that amount of test. I am getting mixed rumors from heathcare workers I personally know. I hear that many are still not tested and being told to stay at home. I am also being told the hospitals receive a large bucket of money for every patient they claim is Covid-19 positive (Tested or not) so they are over reporting it.

Negative tests from DHEC Public Health Laboratory 11,111
Negative tests from private laboratories 27,239
Total negative tests 38,350
Total positive tests 4,761
Total number of tests performed in South Carolina 43,111

 

[MWBATL]

[QUOTE="takethepoints, post: 711735, member: 265And remember Brad DeLong's Krugman Rules:

1. Remember that Paul Krugman is right.

2. If your analysis leads you to conclude that Paul Krugman is wrong, refer to rule 1.

Good advice..[/QUOTE]
This is sarcasm, right? Tell me you don’t really believe that. Krugman has been wrong more often than the local weatherman....

 

[MWBATL]

View attachment 8248

Wow. Am I reading this correctly? The implication of that graph is that deaths attributed to Covid are dramatically overstated. Or am I misunderstanding?

 

[BuzzStone]

Wow. Am I reading this correctly? The implication of that graph is that deaths attributed to Covid are dramatically overstated. Or am I misunderstanding?

That is what I took from it too, which would back up some of what I am hearing from our healthcare professionals here in SC that if you contribute a case to Corona independent from if it has been tested for or not, that is a large chunk of money to the facility.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I don't understand how you get to 85% not being at risk - that seems like a strawman. Unless you are saying it is only a risk if you end up in the hospital.

If you take 100% of the workforce and assume a 50% asymptomatic rate (which is the high end estimate right now - 25-50%). That means 50% of your workforce is at risk.
But your at risk is still technically 100% because you don't know who is going to be asymptomatic and who is not. Since there is no natural immunity everyone is technically at risk.

Even if you take it to be just those who are sick enough to be in the hospital - which is a very conservative measure you would come out with a much higher percentage (i'd argue anyone who gets it is at risk given how bad the symptoms tend to be).
Hospitalizations avg between 14-20% for ages 20-44, 21-28% for ages 45-54, 20-30% for ages 55-64.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1105402/covid-hospitalization-rates-us-by-age-group/

So that would get you pretty close to your 15%, but that still leaves another 35% that would get it and miss time from work, potentially alot of time, given the avg recovery time is more than 2 weeks.

I wasn’t using conjecture, I was using the data. You can see what percentage of the workforce is what age and line that up against age-risk profiles we’ve seen with the virus. I’m just saying if you’re a 40 year old in good health and so your risk of a bad health outcome with the virus is almost zero, you probably would rather earn a living and not go bankrupt. And yes be careful along the way.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

They aren't enough.

Nobody is. And there is not a number that is ever enough.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Appropriate the money. Look at the federal funds rate. The government of the US can sell any bond it prints in a New York minute at a negative interest rate, when inflation is factored in. Besides, in a recession there are no inflationary pressures. If the last 10 years have taught us anything at all, that's it. The explanation is … well, why listen to me? Goto:

https://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-warns-of-fiscal-time-bomb-if-relief-insufficient-2020-4

And remember Brad DeLong's Krugman Rules:

1. Remember that Paul Krugman is right.

2. If your analysis leads you to conclude that Paul Krugman is wrong, refer to rule 1.

Good advice.

ps: Krugman's concerns about state and local governments letting massive number of employees go is a real one. Back in 2008-9 that was a major problem and it could be again.

Never take advice from a political hack. Rule number 3. We’ve already lost 30m workers...THIRTY MILLION. It’s not a hypothetical issue. That guy is loony.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

There is a thing called stagflation...

Anyways, in the interview Krugman says we got a "$20-trillion-a-year economy," "20, 25% of the economy is going to be shut down for an extended period," the "[disaster relief bill] might end up being $4 trillion or $5 trillion" instead of the "$2 trillion", which is "not enough money"... I'm not sure his math is adding up with reality. The article was written Apr 2, but the month isn't even over yet and the small business funds are (almost?) depleted, the $1200 check is done, the paycheck protection is (almost?) depleted, and I'm not sure what else I'm missing. The going rate looks more like $2 trillion (on the low end) every couple months, so unless he thinks everything's going to be resolved in under a couple more months, I'm not sure how the bill is going to stop at just $4 or $5 trillion. The odds that this year's economy (I'm assuming he means GDP) hitting $20 trillion (or 75% of that) also isn't a sure bet.

Then at the end of the article, he says Denmark's government is doing a good job by picking up 75% of its tab... Something tells me there's a reason why in any previous economic bumps (minor and major) in history, the option of having the government take over the tab was not considered the obvious easy decision, much less purposely shutting down the majority of the economy.

Yes his math is typically wrong and you caught one of his multiple big errors. A $25T economy is $2T per month. So when we’ve shut down as much as we have it is indeed $2T every couple months.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

For reference South Carolina reported 670 test yesterday. I would expect our numbers to keep declining rapidly with that amount of test. I am getting mixed rumors from heathcare workers I personally know. I hear that many are still not tested and being told to stay at home. I am also being told the hospitals receive a large bucket of money for every patient they claim is Covid-19 positive (Tested or not) so they are over reporting it.

Negative tests from DHEC Public Health Laboratory 11,111
Negative tests from private laboratories 27,239
Total negative tests 38,350
Total positive tests 4,761
Total number of tests performed in South Carolina 43,111

Our tests are declining because our cases are declining. We have a 24/7 prescreening operation. And we STILL test 90% negative. Fewer and fewer people are getting screened, and fewer and fewer people need to get tested. We have had less than 5 new cases in the Charleston are six different times in the last week and a half - and this is a place that had had drive through testing for almost 2 months now.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Wow. Am I reading this correctly? The implication of that graph is that deaths attributed to Covid are dramatically overstated. Or am I misunderstanding?

You could say it a different way, the way Milwaukee has stated it - that most of the deaths are people who were about to die anyway. When they get hit with the virus they have basically no chance of fighting it.

 

[CHE90]

Wow. Am I reading this correctly? The implication of that graph is that deaths attributed to Covid are dramatically overstated. Or am I misunderstanding?

Yes, you are interpreting correctly.

 

[RonJohn]

Wow. Am I reading this correctly? The implication of that graph is that deaths attributed to Covid are dramatically overstated. Or am I misunderstanding?

Before putting too much into that chart, you should ask what the source of the chart is. Not speaking about @CHE90 , but where he got it. And where that person got it. Up until you find the person who made the chart, and then ask where they got the data. Then check the data to ensure that it is actually accurate.

it might be accurate, but it is too easy to make a chart and put it on the internet to believe every chart you see on the internet without investigating for yourself.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Yup. 25% unemployment, but can’t find anybody to come back to work.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/our-re...ntil-august-11587504885?mod=opinion_lead_pos7

Moral risk everywhere is what we've created (I should put in economic post). Especially for big businesses who expect to get bailed out. First we give them a massive tax cut so that many of the S&P500 are paying zero taxes, then we give them more money. (By we I mean the taxpayers.)

Same thing for workers. Why work at an hourly job that really isn't a career when you get paid the same or more at home?

Sad we are here.

There's many angles to look at it from. I think you're underestimating what can happen. Especially when much of everything is unknown. The facts that are out show a virus that is very contagious and can cause permanent damage to lungs and also deadly. .......

Agree 100% with any pathogen which causes pneumonia. Leads to permanent loss of lung capacity in many cases. Then the next case puts you closer to death.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

@GTRanj2 We’re never going to be at zero risk & no matter people can still find fault if they have an agenda. At what point can anyone safely go back to work? How can anyone be sure we’re not making it worse by preventing asymptomatic people from spreading less virulent strains & attaining herd immunity sooner? What if prolonging the agony damages more fragile individuals mental health & more people commit suicide, what if restricting open access to health care results in more heart attacks, what if skipping normal diabetes monitoring/treatment kills a bunch of people that would otherwise survive, pregnant women avoid doctors visits and it causes their unborn baby to die, etc? All we’re hearing about is the singular argument of what if lightning strikes & someone gets C19. There’s more than 1 angle to this saga.

This is a lot like Afghanistan. We got into it, now we got no idea how to get out of it. Frankly, in my county the curve has flatlined for about a month & nobody has any idea how long the patient’s heart should be allowed to stop beating before administering life support.

I liked because I agree we got in without an exit plan. It is easier to stop something than start something. Much easier to destroy or criticize than to build and nurture.

The collateral damage is piling up in anecdotes in my life. BUT we need to understand what we are dealing with better before we open up more. The rhesus monkeys not getting reinfected shortly after recovering is a really good data point for hoping that people can develop an immunity. No idea how long the immunity will be good for or whether the virus with effectively mutate like the flu.

One last thought. If 85% of the people put on ventilators died, why go to the hospital?

And then another last thought. Chart below in cases per 10,000. How in any scenario could Georgia be the right place to "open up" first? State is politically run by uGag grads. Science is secondary to gut feel. West Coast doing much better (although largely with a different strain of COVID-19). Red states are going to win this contest hands down outside of the urban North East (on a cases per 10,000 basis).

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I liked because I agree we got in without an exit plan. It is easier to stop something than start something. Much easier to destroy or criticize than to build and nurture.

The collateral damage is piling up in anecdotes in my life. BUT we need to understand what we are dealing with better before we open up more. The rhesus monkeys not getting reinfected shortly after recovering is a really good data point for hoping that people can develop an immunity. No idea how long the immunity will be good for or whether the virus with effectively mutate like the flu.

One last thought. If 85% of the people put on ventilators died, why go to the hospital?

And then another last thought. Chart below in cases per 10,000. How in any scenario could Georgia be the right place to "open up" first? State is politically run by uGag grads. Science is secondary to gut feel. West Coast doing much better (although largely with a different strain of COVID-19). Red states are going to win this contest hands down outside of the urban North East (on a cases per 10,000 basis).

I think the chart is wrong. The entire state of South Carolina is at 10 cases per 10k people. That's supposedly to barely be a blip on their chart with that scale. But the entire state is nearly covered. Tennessee is also 10 cases per 10k people, but its showing as empty.

 

[LibertyTurns]

And then another last thought. Chart below in cases per 10,000. How in any scenario could Georgia be the right place to "open up" first? State is politically run by uGag grads. Science is secondary to gut feel. West Coast doing much better (although largely with a different strain of COVID-19). Red states are going to win this contest hands down outside of the urban North East (on a cases per 10,000 basis).

Wow, look at Tennessee. We should all be chugging moonshine, chucking our toothbrushes in the trash and marrying our sisters!

 

[GoldZ]

Or you develop a vaccine. I think that's our only realistic hope. I don't think this program is sustainable for an area as large as the US with a population distribution like ours. Not to mention the problems with scale. We can try and we might slow the thing down, if we are conscientious. But to defeat it we need mass inoculation. The sooner the better.

Agree, but how realistic is this? Sars, Mers, and the common cold results from extensive efforts, don't exactly inspire confidence. Otoh, we are more advanced today and very motivated. Bottom line is, we definitely need it and realistically can hope for it.