Impact of the new Coronavirus where you are?

[Ken Gargett]

1 hour ago, dangolf18 said:

1. Numbers are mainly going up to due us just ramping up testing. 2. The economy cannot "just" recover. Most businesses with zero revenue or cashflow go under in 30 days. Companies like Boeing are on life-support at the moment.

no, the "numbers" go up because more people get infected. we might be now finding more because of better testing but the real problem is the virus.

i know what you mean but look at the other major countries to have large %s (yes, all relative). spain, iran, italy, germany and so on. many of those did not have quite the same issues testing. yet those numbers have been skyrocketing over the last week. the only one that seems to have flattened is china - i understand many of us have doubts as to their reporting (and reporting in general). so it could be that or perhaps it is their lockdown policies. 

even if this finished today, and it is obviously not going to do that, the economy is badly damaged. by the time this is over, it could be catastrophic. i'm trying to borrow some money this week - not large amounts - because no one is paying me and i do have to make some payments. so i am all too aware of the problems. but seriously, you cannot put lives ahead of the economy (yes, many will). i am all too aware that there is every chance that i could very likely be belly up by the end of this. certainly, a devastated economy will bring about many more problems and cause issues, but for now, it has to be the health of people first.

the family and friends comment by our unfortunately named friend, capt corona, is right. if we were offered the choice of a healthy business/bank account or a healthy family, which would most of us opt for? 

[DaBoot]

I think upwards of 85% of people will get it.the virus spreads so easily, unavoidable imo.  The key is to flatten the curve not to overwhelm the health system. Of course the numbers go up, as they are testing millions more people, and time is not our friend currently.  Hopefully those at risk can hide long enough to find a cure, and a vaccine. Reality of the global world today we live in. Stay safe

Forced Government shutdowns in the name of safety..I have no say , so I have no opinion.

But as always, you are free to seclude yourselves voluntarily forever if you choose.

 

[BellevilleMXZ]

A very good watch...

 

[Capt. Corona]

3 hours ago, dangolf18 said:

1. Numbers are mainly going up to due us just ramping up testing. 2. The economy cannot "just" recover. Most businesses with zero revenue or cashflow go under in 30 days. Companies like Boeing are on life-support at the moment.

Where did I say the economy will "just" recover?  Please read what I did say... "it can and will recover"  It always has and it always will recover even after every down period created by whatever cause the down turn in the first place.  My point being... saving lives in pandemic times should take precedence over everything else.

Of course the positive case numbers are going to increase with increased testing....until the test kits run out....and they are very quickly being depleted in my state.  The first ones sent here by the feds were a bunch of botches and showed inconclusive results.  One of the reasons I believe why our numbers in the state were so low.  Once we run out, the confirmed cases will stall again and start to give false hope while the virus still will run rampant.   Let's face the hard facts.  Total unpreparedness on a multitude of levels because it's like watching someone else's house burn to the ground while we ourselves believe something like that will never happen to us. 

[Capt. Corona]

37 minutes ago, BellevilleMXZ said:

A very good watch...

 

I never paid much attention to Mr Gates until last night.  I knew him and his wife had a foundation that was a world wide offering. That was about it for me... just some rich guy doing good with some of his excess moola.  My eyes were opened and I intend to educate myself more about the man and his ways.

[Riverstyx]

“seriously, you cannot put lives ahead of the economy”

@Ken Gargett I don’t understand this argument.  This is done all day every day with too many examples to count. There’s a risk people and the governments think is acceptable with all things, including viruses. 

[CaptainQuintero]

  I've been hesitant to order fast food in this climate but decided to break up the monotony

  I ordered a Chinese delivery from a local place (I won't name them) just got it contactless delivered. I placed it on kitchen work top and as I was getting plates , I heard the bags rustling and moving!! I thought what the hell is that. Has something got in the bag? I thought I could see a little pair of eyes peering out at me. I was so scared as the bag was moving around I leaned forward, picked up the bag, put it on the floor broom in one hand and there it was again, more rustling and little eyes looking out behind the prawn crackers, I thought its got to be a rat or a mouse or something, so I carefully pulled the bag down ...

And there it was ....

... A Peeking Duck!!!

[BellevilleMXZ]

19 hours ago, Capt. Corona said:

I never paid much attention to Mr Gates until last night.  I knew him and his wife had a foundation that was a world wide offering. That was about it for me... just some rich guy doing good with some of his excess moola.  My eyes were opened and I intend to educate myself more about the man and his ways.

Yes same here....someone pointed me towards this vid

He had mentioned this happening several years ago actually...

https://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gates_the_next_outbreak_we_re_not_ready?language=en

 

[Riverstyx]

2 hours ago, db13 said:

This is deeply disturbing on many levels...

I’m still not understanding the view here. Do you think we should have shut down the entire economy for swine flu to have minimized the 18,000 lives that perished in the US? I don’t see the logic but I’m open to listening. 

[Ken Gargett]

17 minutes ago, Riverstyx said:

I’m still not understanding the view here. Do you think we should have shut down the entire economy for swine flu to have minimized the 18,000 lives that perished in the US? I don’t see the logic but I’m open to listening. 

i understand the tradeoff that occurs day to day, year to year, but this is an active threat that is killing people around the world and the end is not in sight. if you need to have someone explain that the priority should be saving lives then, with respect, i really don't think you'll ever understand. perhaps when you/your family/friends are afflicted that might change. 

[westg]

Global forecast is 10 million deaths Ken. And the simple question being if it was your wife or child would you shut it all down to save one.  Of course you would Riverstyx.

[TheGipper]

12 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

if you need to have someone explain that the priority should be saving lives then, with respect, i really don't think you'll ever understand. perhaps when you/your family/friends are afflicted that might change. 

This is condescending virtue signaling.

Anyone can easily outbid your compassion by advocating global ban on all automobiles to prevent the well more than one million road deaths every year.  Would you oppose that?  I assume you're sensible and would oppose an all out ban.

And when you express opposition to that, would you like to have someone suggest "I really don't think you'll ever understand".   It's condescending and rude.  He's raising a valid and difficult question to answer.  You're not morally superior to him for not wanting to even think about or calmly discuss the issue.

[Riverstyx]

12 minutes ago, TheGipper said:

This is condescending virtue signaling.

Anyone can easily outbid your compassion by advocating global ban on all automobiles to prevent the well more than one million road deaths every year.  Would you oppose that?  I assume you're sensible and would oppose an all out ban.

And when you express opposition to that, would you like to have someone suggest "I really don't think you'll ever understand".   It's condescending and rude.  He's raising a valid and difficult question to answer.  You're not morally superior to him for not wanting to even think about or calmly discuss the issue.

Thank you. I’m asking if it’s really a logical argument to an objective observer. And if it was my wife? Hell yes, I’d do anything to save her but again, that could be said about any of the issues (e.g. H1N1, etc). (Also, it has affected me as I have a close friend that has it.) With respect, if you’re emotionally invested without being open to other opinions, you won’t ever TRY to understand. Which is all I’m trying to do. 

[Ken Gargett]

10 minutes ago, TheGipper said:

This is condescending virtue signaling.

Anyone can easily outbid your compassion by advocating global ban on all automobiles to prevent the well more than one million road deaths every year.  Would you oppose that?  I assume you're sensible and would oppose an all out ban.

And when you express opposition to that, would you like to have someone suggest "I really don't think you'll ever understand".   It's condescending and rude.  He's raising a valid and difficult question to answer.  You're not morally superior to him for not wanting to even think about or calmly discuss the issue.

i don't recall claiming superiority in any form over anyone but read into it what you want. and thanks for assuming things on my behalf, if you want condescending and rude. 

you think whether or not we should try and save potentially millions of people is a difficult question? it might be for you but i would hope not. 

i am all too aware of the damage this is doing to the economy. as i have said elsewhere, i am trying to borrow money to stay afloat. even if i can, the best outcome for me will likely be years of debt. more likely, bankruptcy. the day i swap that for someone's life is not worth thinking about. 

the rest of what you say is ludicrous. you want to compare the benefits of automobiles to the benefits of a pandemic? 

 

[El Presidente]

Play the ball and not the man. Many of you are sailing close to the wind. If you have seen a post deleted, you are likely to be close behind. 

For the record, I believe a 100% LockDown to be an absolute last resort.  If you can pull off a staged shutdown accompanied by social distancing to slow the virus, great.

Economies are millions of businesses the majority of which are small to medium in size backed by mums and dads who have been told to jump off a cliff by public servants for the sake of the community.  Those public servants are still getting paid.....they will be fine. 

The pushback/scepticism is understandable. 

If 100% lockdown has to occur then so be it but ensure small and medium business is taken care of up front and  the mechanism for their survival simply not kicked down to road.

 

[Riverstyx]

I feel like there were a lot of assumptions made that are not remotely close to what I said.

@Ken Gargett"If you need to have someone explain that the priority should be saving lives then, with respect, i really don't think you'll ever understand."  I never said the priority shouldn't be saving lives.  Never.  Ever.  That's changing what I said entirely.

 @db13"I have a problem with greed and selfishness. When is enough enough? At the expense of lives? Apparently not for some folks."  This appears to be in reference to my post (if not, I apologize).  If you think what I originally said is due to greed and selfishness, I think you should read it again.  

What I did say is that a blanket statement like, "Seriously, you cannot put lives ahead of the economy" doesn't make sense to me.  It appears to me to be inconsistent and hypocritical.  Should we have shut down the whole global economy for H1N1?  I have absolutely no clue whether the coronavirus is worthy of shutting down the economy and made no arguments for or against it; and my view is irrelevant to the question but it appears others assume I'm saying something I'm not so I'll just clarify that.  And that appears to be what you're arguing with me about, but that's not what I said. There is plenty of overconfidence right now, and I think it's more helpful to be open minded rather than telling me I won't ever understand something.  As Rob said, "play the ball and not the man."  Don't attack me instead of answering the question.  What happened to civil discourse?

 

[JamesKPolkEsq]

Some perspective, and looking forward.

Every day, around the world, about 40 people/million die (estimated mean lifespan of 70 years). On a typical day 13200 Americans die, today we’ve lost about 500 to COVID-19, increasing our death rate by 4% (obviously much higher in the hot-spots).

Italy’s population of 60 million means that on average 2,400 Italians die each day. Today, about 900 Italians died of COVID-19, increasing the death rate by nearly 40%. They are not out of the woods. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/03/28/coronavirus-latest-news/

It took 1 month to get 1,000 dead in the US from COVID-19. The next 1,000 took two days. 

[El Presidente]

26 minutes ago, JamesKPolkEsq said:

 

It took 1 month to get 1,000 dead in the US from COVID-19. The next 1,000 took two days. 

 

It is indeed deadly serious. 

I won't permit posts referring to it all as a "Hoax" or "just a flu" while we  currently have Italian and Spanish members locked up and watching their kin drop like flies around them. Re-reading some of the posts early on in this thread shows how wrong people can be. There needs to be some decency and understanding of what people are going through internationally. People need to think outside of their built in biases. However, nobody should ever be asked to stop questioning and simply swallow the official line. 

 

[Ken Gargett]

if i have misread or misunderstood anyone's posts then i most sincerely apologise. similarly if i have misspoken myself in relation to this.

if i may clarify my position briefly - i am all in favour of everything possible being done to revive/sustain/maintain the economy but not at the expense of lives. and i find it extremely difficult to understand how anyone could think otherwise. 

i shall now retire for lunch. 

[El Presidente]

1 hour ago, Ken Gargett said:

if i may clarify my position briefly - i am all in favour of everything possible being done to revive/sustain/maintain the economy but not at the expense of lives. and i find it extremely difficult to understand how anyone could think otherwise. 

Ken, the destruction of peoples livelihoods also costs lives and has a long term impact. Those lives just don't appear on a score sheet. 

To reiterate, Government has an unenviable job to get the balance right. I am not sure they can. 

[Ken Gargett]

1 hour ago, El Presidente said:

Ken, the destruction of peoples livelihoods also costs lives and has a long term impact. Those lives just don't appear on a score sheet. 

To reiterate, Government has an unenviable job to get the balance right. I am not sure they can. 

i would think that my posts make it blindingly obvious that i am all too aware of that. but the first priority must surely be saving lives. i'm not silly enough to suggest that if it were a choice between a blind 95-year-old cripple with terminal diptheria and the world economy, we throw out the economy, but there are potentially millions of lives at stake. millions die and the economy is down the toilet anyway. 

i'd go further re the govts - i don't think there is a balance. it is way past that. there is a nightmare ahead. either way. i've said numerous times that everything possible that can be done to save the economy should be. but the first priority must be people. 

govts around the world are concerned about re-election if this continues. good luck with re-election wherever you are if the news is filled with reports and scenes of mass graves. 

on a slightly lighter note, i saw a report saying that if the NFL season is cancelled, the draft for next year will be for teams to pick in exactly the same order except that every team moves up one slot and the poor bengals, having first pick this time, go to the end of the queue. so skins would get first pick!! i really do not see it happening. 

[El Presidente]

11 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

i'd go further re the govts - i don't think there is a balance. it is way past that. there is a nightmare ahead. either way. i've said numerous times that everything possible that can be done to save the economy should be. but the first priority must be people. 

If saving all lives is the only/first priority then the only course of action is to go straight to Lockdown day one. No brainer. 

 I disagree with that course of action under current circumstances.  it simply destroys lives in a different manner. 

I would agree with that course of action (complete lockdown) if everyone (excluding front line services) was to share that burden evenly. Everyone (public servants and other incomes non affected) levied 20% of their income to go into a societal pool to subsidise those service industries shut down at the stroke of a government  pen/point of a government gun. 

 

[Ken Gargett]

19 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

If saving all lives is the only/first priority then the only course of action is to go straight to Lockdown day one. No brainer. 

 I disagree with that course of action under current circumstances.  it simply destroys lives in a different manner. 

I would agree with that course of action (complete lockdown) if everyone (excluding front line services) was to share that burden evenly. Everyone (public servants and other incomes non affected) levied 20% of their income to go into a societal pool to subsidise those service industries shut down at the stroke of a government  pen/point of a government gun. 

 

i did not say only priority. and realistically, there was almost no chance we'd go straight into lockdown. like it or not, humanity has to be dragged kicking and screaming to get where it should be, so often. things don't dawn on us as quickly as we'd like, people hate change, they hope for the best, they operate on what benefits them even if it is to the detriment of the majority, they think they are bulletproof - and i am as guilty of all this as anyone. i suspect that there were very very few people, experts or not, calling for an immediate and full lockdown day one. was never going to happen until the seriousness got through. i suspect that the seriousness is still not through to many. 

if ever there was a time when you'd love to be proved wrong, love to have people saying i told you so, this would be it. just don't see it. 

the one thing you can guarantee is that when we are through this - either by it disappearing a la sars thanks to lockdowns or whatever, or by flattening the curve to the extent we can handle it and then when the next wave hits, we have the vaccine (wonder how many anti-vaxxers are rethinking their philosophy now?) - hindsight will be a bitch. some govts will have done better than others but very few will get much credit and i don't care what angle their politics are. 

[TheGipper]

3 hours ago, JamesKPolkEsq said:

Italy’s population of 60 million means that on average 2,400 Italians die each day. Today, about 900 Italians died of COVID-19, increasing the death rate by nearly 40%.

In Europe, excess deaths over the seasonally-adjusted baseline are tracked by an organization called EuroMOMO (European Mortality Monitoring Project).

I would commend to you to watch their reporting at https://www.euromomo.eu/index.html

Technology is giving us the tools to identify and respond to these kind of events with an accuracy and timeliness that people in 1918 could only have dreamed of.

[Ken Gargett]

11 minutes ago, TheGipper said:

In Europe, excess deaths over the seasonally-adjusted baseline are tracked by an organization called EuroMOMO (European Mortality Monitoring Project).

I would commend to you to watch their reporting at https://www.euromomo.eu/index.html

Technology is giving us the tools to identify and respond to these kind of events with an accuracy and timeliness that people in 1918 could only have dreamed of.

certainly agree on what you say about technology. but the downside is that technology has also allowed it to spread far quicker and far more likely - international flights for example. in the end, you would have to assume that the technology will be very much a positive in the fight against this. 

i've been following https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries which seems to be relatively accurate when i compare it to what other sites are saying. timing of the daily reports can be a bit misleading between countries as they seem to start they day between 11 and 12 our time. it shows that we have already today, in australia, recorded a 10% increase in cases. looks like we will have a tough week if we follow other countries. 

two things.

i am not really sure why so many people, here and elsewhere, seem so quick to say that well flu kills XX so this is just like a bad flu or things along those lines. no one argues that, to an extent, but this is something new. we have no real idea how bad it might be - we have decades of records for flu so we know what is likely. if down the track, we know that (once vaccines are in place etc) this virus will kill say 100,000 a year, it will be treated much like a flu or something of that ilk. we won't be in this chaos or panic. it will become part of life. we'll get the annual vaccine. we'll make whatever is necessary to deal with this a part of daily life and it will be second nature. but we do not know this (i am not aiming these comments at you - just in general). until we do, i believe we have to work to try and limit as many deaths as possible.

 

something that has nothing to do with the virus but your comment re the cars got me thinking. i still think that they are not relatable in relation to the virus, but what would the situation be if...

say we go back 100/150 years. to pre-car days. an alien being arrives and says to world leaders - 'i will grant you an invention which will transform life on your planet. it will allow even the common man the ability to travel far and wide, relatively cheaply. in comfort. it make lives infinitely easier. it will allow for goods and people to be moved quicker than ever dreamt of. 

BUT, in return, i demand you sacrifice a million people a year and they will be random - male, female, old, young, innocent, idiots, drunks, the fit and healthy. while it will make lives easier, it will contribute massively to the pollution across your planet and may even eventually contribute to climate change which will eventually destroy your way of life'.

what do you reckon the response would be? i'm honestly not sure i know the answer to that. anyway, that is just me with some idle speculation.