• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

NON_POLITICAL China Coronavirus THREAD

Page 312 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Nov 8, 2012
20,778
4,752
136
New Zealand locked the entire country down and blocked all foreign air traffic and ships. They banned any foreigner from entering New Zealand. Not even 14 day quarantine. Just outright ban of foreigners. And when you're so spread out on a large island like New Zealand, it makes sense they would stop the spread of the virus with their extreme lockdown measures if you do it early enough. I think they also banned all restaurants, even takeout. I don't think any country did that except New Zealand.
I hear being an island is convenient in a lot of those factors...
 

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
9,214
4,026
136
I hear being an island is convenient in a lot of those factors...
UK shows you can still manage to mess everything, up if you make the effort.

NZ does have the big advantage of being rather remote, and not a major global hub, though, that's clearly true. That's why all those zillionaires buy bolt-hole homes there.
 

H T C

Senior member
Nov 7, 2018
407
242
86
In regard to Sweden, yes they are trying a different approach. Yes that means right now more people will die. If they get overwhelmed then even more people will die. If they keep it at a fairly high burn without becoming overwhelmed and it turns out immunity is at least somewhat common then they will hit the point where they are business as usual while places like New Zealand are still hiding in the corner waiting for a vaccine before opening up to the rest of the world.

There should be an upside to lots of people getting the virus and that is faster herd immunity and more natural restrictions to spread, like basically any other disease that would be terrifying if it was a novel virus. However that does not mean open everything up and don't worry about protecting yourself or others. It means we need to open things up a bit, like non-spring break style beach going should be perfectly fine, and keeping things we have to have running like the food production and delivery industries. We are not going to be able to make this go away, it will not be completely gone even with a vaccine. We need to keep the exposure rate below the people dying in the streets level but not kill ourselves through paralysis either. Testing, both active and antibody, and contact tracing are imperative to widespread reopening with personal responsibility to limit the spread.
I made a chart of infected cases using data from several countries taken from Johns Hopkins University's data as well as Portugal's official site, and this is the result:

Screenshot from 2020-04-30 20-13-28.png

In this chart, each horizontal line represents a doubling of the previous horizontal line, starting from 40 cases. The bigger the curve's angle, the worse whatever current measures the country has put in place are having effect.

When we see both New Zealand and South Korea, it's very clear they have their COVID-19 outbreak under control (@ least for now): when they talk about "flatten the curve" they REALLY mean it.

France, Germany and UK have a similar number of cases but, while France and Germany's curve angle is similar, UK's is quite different, and not in a good way.

It appears to me that, in this chart, UK's curve is the worst, followed closely by USA's and Sweden: this is a "title" i'm sure UK does NOT want ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: local and IronWing

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
63,052
16,547
136
Looks like the US, UK, and Sweden have the steepest slopes at the moment. Whatever Spain is doing, isn't sufficient.
 

manly

Diamond Member
Jan 25, 2000
9,241
686
126
Oh darn! You're right! Damn me!

God forbid you do a simple web search to realize that when I said the fatality rate of the flu was 0.01% that you instead realize that it was 0.1%.

But hey - it's pretty hilarious that you cite my number but try to dismiss my argument at the same time.
You can't even get basic facts and figures right and want to argue the merits of an argument?
Your argument boils down to 5x as deadly as seasonal flu isn't all that bad, when compared to a severe recession. Oh and FYGM.
Obviously, policy officials have to weigh a forced recession vs. an epidemic spreading through communities. Like I said earlier, if you knew your outcome would be like Sweden, you might even roll the dice. But that's kind of a best case scenario. The thing is the U.S. has data from the 1918 flu pandemic, and policy experts know that looser measures led to worse outcomes (in both infections and economically).
 
  • Like
Reactions: darkswordsman17

ponyo

Lifer
Feb 14, 2002
19,373
2,627
126
Delta and Frontier joining JetBlue requiring passengers to wear masks.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/30/coronavirus-travel-delta-air-lines-will-require-passengers-wear-masks.html

And Wells Fargo is joining JP Morgan Chase in not accepting any application for new home line of credit. Basically, Wells Fargo and Chase are scared people will tap their home line of credit when they need the money and banks are scared home values are going to fall. If I were the banks, I would be far more worried about crazy credit card debts than home line of credit.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
18,206
7,099
136
everyone on this thread is going to have a PhD by the time this whole thing is over
I hope not. Getting an advanced degree is a good way to get fired (salary bloat).

I'm not sure why some people are representing there is a "lockdown forever" desire. Nobody thinks that.
It isn't complicated. Some folks are running out of money during this mess while others aren't.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,837
12,583
136
Delta and Frontier joining JetBlue requiring passengers to wear masks.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/30/coronavirus-travel-delta-air-lines-will-require-passengers-wear-masks.html

And Wells Fargo is joining JP Morgan Chase in not accepting any application for new home line of credit. Basically, Wells Fargo and Chase are scared people will tap their home line of credit when they need the money and banks are scared home values are going to fall. If I were the banks, I would be far more worried about crazy credit card debts than home line of credit.
American Airlines also will require masks starting May 11.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,837
12,583
136
It isn't complicated. Some folks are running out of money during this mess while others aren't.
This is an argument I've seen in the media by some people with extraordinary wealth. Also, letting people run out of money is a policy choice so it's not like there wasn't an alternative.

In related news I never was able to apply for unemployment in Texas. Phone lines jammed morning to night. Now Abbott is rolling back UI eligibility lol.
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,190
852
126
This is an argument I've seen in the media by some people with extraordinary wealth. Also, letting people run out of money is a policy choice so it's not like there wasn't an alternative.

In related news I never was able to apply for unemployment in Texas. Phone lines jammed morning to night. Now Abbott is rolling back UI eligibility lol.
My UE office out-right disconnected the phone lines. You are expected to apply online.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
18,206
7,099
136
Also, letting people run out of money is a policy choice so it's not like there wasn't an alternative.
A policy choice by whom??? They're running out of money because they have no work. Not because the government has been insufficiently generous. The government is running up huge deficits, and Medicare is about to crash out in 2026. It may die earlier! We were actually making some headway in pushing out Social Security's insolvency thanks to increased FICA payments, but that's dead now. Social Security is about to backslide. The shit is hitting the fan, man. Don't expect the debt-ridden government to save you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: s0me0nesmind1

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
63,052
16,547
136
A policy choice by whom??? They're running out of money because they have no work. Not because the government has been insufficiently generous. The government is running up huge deficits, and Medicare is about to crash out in 2026. It may die earlier! We were actually making some headway in pushing out Social Security's insolvency thanks to increased FICA payments, but that's dead now. Social Security is about to backslide. The shit is hitting the fan, man. Don't expect the debt-ridden government to save you.
So restore the taxbase. All the fiscal problems you listed are a direct result of the policy choices made to reduce taxes on the ultra-rich.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,837
12,583
136
A policy choice by whom???
The government.

They're running out of money because they have no work. Not because the government has been insufficiently generous
The government just should have paid employers to keep people on at 80% like the euros did. No millions of people trying to apply for unemployment on systems that don't work.

The government is running up huge deficits
They need to be huge-er. Even Powell is imploring congress to spend more and not worry about it.

Medicare is about to crash out in 2026. It may die earlier! We were actually making some headway in pushing out Social Security's insolvency thanks to increased FICA payments, but that's dead now. Social Security is about to backslide. The shit is hitting the fan, man. Don't expect the debt-ridden government to save you.
Entirely irrelevant to our current circumstances. Almost comically so.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
18,206
7,099
136
So restore the taxbase. All the fiscal problems you listed are a direct result of the policy choices made to reduce taxes on the ultra-rich.
No they are not! Europe is having this problem. China is having this problem. Covid-19 is making it worse. Even if you "restore the tax base", you can only extract so much wealth from society before you run out. You can transform our society into an autocratic dictatorship with yourself as Living God Xi Part 2 and you can't create any more wealth from thin air.

Step out of your political bubble. Trump and his glorious economy can't fix the problem . . . he won't even try. The Green New Deal will not fix it. Nothing will! Our society wants to spend more than it creates.

@K1052

The government does not have that kind of money. It's all deficit spending. They can't confiscate enough wealth to pay people that way. The government is dependent on our economy to survive - not the other way around!
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
63,052
16,547
136
No they are not! Europe is having this problem. China is having this problem. Covid-19 is making it worse. Even if you "restore the tax base", you can only extract so much wealth from society before you run out. You can transform our society into an autocratic dictatorship with yourself as Living God Xi Part 2 and you can't create any more wealth from thin air.

Step out of your political bubble. Trump and his glorious economy can't fix the problem . . . he won't even try. The Green New Deal will not fix it. Nothing will! Our society wants to spend more than it creates.

@K1052

The government does not have that kind of money. It's all deficit spending. They can't confiscate enough wealth to pay people that way. The government is dependent on our economy to survive - not the other way around!
Social Security is looking bleak because wealth and income is now concentrated at the top, eroding the SS tax base. Ditto for Medicare. Individuals have less cushion because they make less money than past generations because the fruits of their labor are being allocated to the wealthiest in society. The parasitic wealth class is bleeding the nation dry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: K1052

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,837
12,583
136
The government does not have that kind of money. It's all deficit spending. They can't confiscate enough wealth to pay people that way. The government is dependent on our economy to survive - not the other way around!
Weird, it seems to find it if are a few wars to fight, some tax cuts to dole out to donors, or a shiny (yet poorly functional) weapons system the defense industry wants to sell.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
18,206
7,099
136
Social Security is looking bleak because wealth and income is now concentrated at the top
No, Social Security is looking bleak because it was created under the assumption that most people would die by 65, so that it would not have to pay out benefits to many of its contributors. So Congress decades ago decided it would be a good idea to borrow against the trust fund with low-yield bonds that have never kept up with inflation. It blew up in their face. The people who made those decisions are mostly dead now.

Ditto for Medicare.
Medicare suffers from the same basic premise: nobody expected people to live so long. Only it's far worse-off than Social Security, and it often pays 88% or less of bills already. It's only going to get worse. It slides into insolvency in 2026 (or earlier1) which is when the Feds must pay the difference from the general budget. That is why it is highly-relevant to the situation at hand! Any money we spend NOW for the benefit of the unemployed is going to be in direct competition with Medicare for funding.

And HUD

And food stamps

And welfare

And every other social benefit program the Federal government has introduced over the years. You think you've seen political blood sport? You ain't seen nothing yet.

Individuals have less cushion because they make less money than past generations because the fruits of their labor are being allocated to the wealthiest in society. The parasitic wealth class is bleeding the nation dry.
Even if you took all the money from the "parasitic wealth class" and gave it to the government, the government would still be in debt.

Weird, it seems to find it if are a few wars to fight, some tax cuts to dole out to donors, or a shiny (yet poorly functional) weapons system the defense industry wants to sell.
Those wars are cheap in comparison.


We just spent more than twice the cost of the war in Afghanistan, a war that has raged for nearly two decades. And we did it in less than a quarter. You could cut all military spending (ha ha) and still not have enough.

There is not enough money to pay for this nonsense.

Covid-19 is busy ravaging the tax base. Everything was going to fall apart anyway, sometime after Medicare began to compete directly with other spending initiatives for money from the general budget. Now it's even worse. We have $2 trillion less in deficit spending available to give us wiggle room in dealing with that disaster. Now Social Security is sliding back into insolvency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: s0me0nesmind1

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
63,052
16,547
136
If the same percentage of GDP went into SS now as did in the 70s, there would be no funding crisis. The SS tax base was eroded as the wealthy grabbed an ever bigger piece of the pie and took their slice via methods not subject to FICA. Subjecting that income to FICA permanently solves the SS funding issue.
What you call “nonsense “ l call survival and dignity for all.
 

manly

Diamond Member
Jan 25, 2000
9,241
686
126
A policy choice by whom???
Paul Krugman calls them deficit vultures:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/27/opinion/republicans-deficits-coronavirus.html

He cited this interesting blog post:
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,837
12,583
136
Those wars are cheap in comparison.


We just spent more than twice the cost of the war in Afghanistan, a war that has raged for nearly two decades. And we did it in less than a quarter. You could cut all military spending (ha ha) and still not have enough.
Haha that's just direct spend of one war. Total lifetime cost of Afghanistan and Iraq will be trillions more. CBO says deficit caused by just the recent tax cuts is about $2T over 10 years. Lifetime program cost of the F35 is about $1.5T now and that's likely to grow.

Also when the Fed chairman is waving his arms for congress to do more fiscal stimulus during what will be the worst downturn since the depression you do fiscal stimulus until it's over.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
18,206
7,099
136
If the same percentage of GDP went into SS now as did in the 70s, there would be no funding crisis.
If the 1970s hadn't introduced "stagflation" that might still be possible.

Paul Krugman calls them deficit vultures:
Oh God, please don't bring up that idiot. I'm surprised the leftists haven't run him off with pitchforks yet. He's an embarrassment on the same level as Trump. Yes it's stupid to watch the Republicans talk about deficits NOW when the last chance to effect meaningful change was maybe 25 years ago. That didn't work. We're whores, and we spend like whores. We're dead meat. It's over. Covid-19 is accelerating the process.

Haha that's just direct spend of one war. Total lifetime cost of Afghanistan and Iraq will be trillions more.
That would still be less in 20 years time than we spent in one quarter on Covid-19. Never mind that I just showed you an article for the total cost of the war in Afghanistan, and you want to say "nuuuu it costs more huhuhuh". Thanks pal.

CBO says deficit caused by just the recent tax cuts is about $2T over 10 years.
Which is how much we just spent in one quarter. And we need to spend more apparently! When is that going to sink in?

Lifetime program cost of the F35 is about $1.5T now and that's likely to grow.
The F35 program has been running since 1995.

Also when the Fed chairman is waving his arms for congress to do more fiscal stimulus during what will be the worst downturn since the depression you do fiscal stimulus until it's over.
That's a bad idea on so many levels. Let's see what the Fed chairman has to say when we're overleveraged and we can't borrow any more money. Sequester time!

This is why this thread does not need politics in it. Politics brings in the stupidity, in droves. You can not reorganize society in such a way to overcome crushing debt. You might be able to prevent future debt, but you can't eliminate it by electing a different official. I could put any one of you in charge of all society, and regardless of your political affiliation, you can not create enough wealth on your own. People that you don't know and that you don't control might be able to fix the problem by taking care of themselves, their families, their friends, and their communities. No amount of MAGA or New Deal Part 2 will solve the problem. But leave it to bloviating politicians and their toadies to try and use this opportunity as a way to elevate their own position. Take your stupid politics back to P&N where it belongs.
 

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,230
136
A leading biomedical research institution published a paper just last month:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/03/200317175442.htm

Not saying that this is settled fact (it may never be). However, that Dr. Rath Health Foundation Web site appears kind of dodgy:
https://www.dr-rath-foundation.org/2020-03-lets-stop-the-virus-lets-end-the-hysteria/

Sounds like he's been saying for decades that Vitamin C and other vitamins prevent and cure serious diseases?
The possibility of a lab accident / accidental release would still be "natural origin." They we're studying coronavirus in bats collected from...nature.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY