• 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 460 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Nov 8, 2012
19,732
4,438
136
So? We'll be alright. I wish the US government would quit giving loans and money to these loser airlines like American and United and let them suffer and fail if they have to. Supporting these zombie companies helps no one except the terrible management who will continue to pay themselves outsized compensation. Let these loser companies fail and let the bankruptcy courts do their work. Propping up loser airlines and other companies is not the answer.
I agree.

Same with the bailouts of our shit auto companies.
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
8,618
3,380
136
This is true. Not doing more stimulus not is bad on a lot of levels for people. Regular UI is about to run out for millions as well.
I prefer more targeted distributions to the unemployed, but anything is better than nothing.
 

ponyo

Lifer
Feb 14, 2002
18,953
2,283
126
Direct payment to US population is the best. Forget bailing out failing businesses and PPP loans and all stupid programs that's subject to massive fraud and abuse. Just send helicopter money to US taxpayers and let us choose where we want to spend the money. Let us choose which companies and businesses we want to support with our money.

Businesses will fail. But if it's really important business or actual demand is there, another will eventually take its place. Direct payment to US people is the simplest and the best solution. It boggles my mind why stupid lawmakers want to create these complex ineffective plans that's subject to fraud and waste massive amount of taxpayers money. US consumers make up majority of the economy. So just give us the money and cut out all the bullshit middlemen and bureaucracy.
 
Nov 8, 2012
19,732
4,438
136
Direct payment to US population is the best. Forget bailing out failing businesses and PPP loans and all stupid programs that's subject to massive fraud and abuse. Just send helicopter money to US taxpayers and let us choose where we want to spend the money. Let us choose which companies and businesses we want to support with our money.

Businesses will fail. But if it's really important business or actual demand is there, another will eventually take its place. Direct payment to US people is the simplest and the best solution. It boggles my mind why stupid lawmakers want to create these complex ineffective plans that's subject to fraud and waste massive amount of taxpayers money. US consumers make up majority of the economy. So just give us the money and cut out all the bullshit middlemen and bureaucracy.
While I agree with you on the face of it... that bailing out ANY companies was wrong and to instead let the market decide (give to consumers - allow them to decide what to spend it on) the problem is that the government was playing a role by doing things like demanding places like salons, massage places, restaurants, bars, gyms, etc... MUST close or only allow 50% capacity or whatever.

You can't declare that these places be closed or not at full capacity while not supporting them in some way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: destrekor

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,190
845
126
Direct payment to US population is the best. Forget bailing out failing businesses and PPP loans and all stupid programs that's subject to massive fraud and abuse. Just send helicopter money to US taxpayers and let us choose where we want to spend the money. Let us choose which companies and businesses we want to support with our money.

Businesses will fail. But if it's really important business or actual demand is there, another will eventually take its place. Direct payment to US people is the simplest and the best solution. It boggles my mind why stupid lawmakers want to create these complex ineffective plans that's subject to fraud and waste massive amount of taxpayers money. US consumers make up majority of the economy. So just give us the money and cut out all the bullshit middlemen and bureaucracy.
Letting them spend it where they want means letting those places resume business as usual. If they did that, those same businesses wouldn't need a bailout.
 

Grey_Beard

Golden Member
Sep 23, 2014
1,585
1,648
136
Direct payment to US population is the best. Forget bailing out failing businesses and PPP loans and all stupid programs that's subject to massive fraud and abuse. Just send helicopter money to US taxpayers and let us choose where we want to spend the money. Let us choose which companies and businesses we want to support with our money.

Businesses will fail. But if it's really important business or actual demand is there, another will eventually take its place. Direct payment to US people is the simplest and the best solution. It boggles my mind why stupid lawmakers want to create these complex ineffective plans that's subject to fraud and waste massive amount of taxpayers money. US consumers make up majority of the economy. So just give us the money and cut out all the bullshit middlemen and bureaucracy.
As long as restrictions are in place, we need to fund the businesses. Not lost revenue, but enough to support lease or mortgage payments and average income for owners, like an average over three years. No PPP forgivable loans to hire people. Let the direct payments to people sort that out. Business owner will get two payments, but if you limit it to businesses under a certain dollar amount or just a percentage of said income over that revenue limit should help. Fraud is going to happen when you blanket pay like that. Not saying that we should not strive for no fraud, but given the complexity of how to pay, it is unavoidable. When you raise taxes in 2022, you get this back with a higher business tax and closing some loopholes.
 

Mai72

Lifer
Sep 12, 2012
10,621
1,150
126
Dr. Osterholm talks about how Spain is getting slammed with COVID19 despite the fact that most are wearing a mask. If true, it's then obvious that we won't be able to pound this virus in the ground just by mask wearing. Also, he goes on to briefly state at the (15.29 mark) that we aren't going to be saved miraculosly by a vaccine. At the (34.58) mark he goes into greater detail about a possible vaccine, and that it's going to take months before we can get it out. Also, that we are a loooooong way from herd immunity with only 10% of America with antibodies. Let's not forget that possibly over 50% of Americans wil not take a vaccine if it has not been 100% proven to be effective with little to no side effects. So, that alone is concern. I know that I'm not taking anything that hasn't been 100% effectively proven to conquer COVID19. This fall is going to be really bad. I'm trying not to be so negative, but on the other hand IMO we need to be realistic.

 

Mai72

Lifer
Sep 12, 2012
10,621
1,150
126
Now that we're over six months into this thing, I think that we can all agree that the "new normal" fucking sucks! Get the damn vaccine done already, so we can go back to the "old" normal!
This "new normal" will be with us for a very very long time. I think it's dangerous to think that our lives will be like it was before the pandemic.

You have to adapt, or else you're in for a very difficult time.

Stockdale Paradox: "You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end—which you can never afford to lose—with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be."
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
36,591
10,558
136
I know that I'm not taking anything that hasn't been 100% effectively proven to conquer COVID19.
This is kind of a strange standard since we try drugs all the time that aren’t 100% guaranteed to be effective. This kind of absolute certainty is rare. The flu inoculation struggles to crack 75% a lot of years but we still take that because the benefits far outweigh the risks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ajay

Mai72

Lifer
Sep 12, 2012
10,621
1,150
126
This is kind of a strange standard since we try drugs all the time that aren’t 100% guaranteed to be effective. This kind of absolute certainty is rare. The flu inoculation struggles to crack 75% a lot of years but we still take that because the benefits far outweigh the risks.
You should check out the podcast with Osterholm. He's getting a ton of email from people stating that they aren't going to get the vaccine. This is his concern though. He has stated that it would be a stretch to get even 50% of the population vaccinated, which would fall seriuosly short of herd immunity. He then goes on to say that middle/low countries won't have access to this vaccine for several years. 2022-23 is the time frame when we could possibly get enough vaccine for the world.

The thing I'm concerned about is we are putting way too much into getting this vaccine, which will probably take some time to come out. It's going to be awhle, so we must prepare for a brutal fall/winter where we will probably see many Americans get sick and die. It's going to get much worse before it get better is what i'm saying. Also, he briefly talked about possible reinfections that are cropping up in countries like India. Finally, we should be in this for the long haul, and many Americans don't want to face the facts. This is very evident by the number of vaccine post in this thread. It's not going to be a cure all, and we need to understand this. Dr. Osterholm talked about this as well. Again, this virus is going to be with us for a very long time.
 
Last edited:

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,190
845
126
It was Trump and Melania right after his closest advisor, Hope Hicks, got sick at a rally. Heard about it around 3AM, which was still yesterday for a lot of the country. Surprised to see posts with no mention since then.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
36,591
10,558
136
You should check out the podcast with Osterholm. He's getting a ton of email from people stating that they aren't going to get the vaccine. This is his concern though. He has stated that it would be a stretch to get even 50% of the population vaccinated, which would fall seriuosly short of herd immunity.
Emails are anecdotal data and the polling I've seen spits out wildly different results based on how the question is asked. We also do not know where the herd immunity threshold is for this virus.

He then goes on to say that middle/low countries won't have access to this vaccine for several years. 2022-23 is the time frame when we could possibly get enough vaccine for the world.
I'd probably agree with this. The US/EU however will have substantial access to several likely viable vaccines in 2021.

The thing I'm concerned about is we are putting way too much into getting this vaccine, which will probably take some time to come out.
There is going to be a ramp and it will be slow at first due to dose supply limitations. We already know this and expert opinion generally reflects Q2-ish before wide availability to the public. That is likely however after maybe 80-100M people who are in priority groups get it.

It's going to be awhle, so we must prepare for a brutal fall/winter where we will probably see many Americans get sick and die. It's going to get much worse before it get better is what i'm saying.
The way we've handled it yes this is essentially certain.

Also, he briefly talked about possible reinfections that are cropping up in countries like India.
We've got a handful of reinfections out of 7M cases. Not unexpected or particularly alarming.

Finally, we should be in this for the long haul, and many Americans don't want to face the facts. This is very evident by the number of vaccine post in this thread. It's not going to be a cure all, and we need to understand this. Dr. Osterholm talked about this as well. Again, this virus is going to be with us for a very long time.
It will be endemic in the US for a few years probably, but declining each one. The world longer since vaccination efforts are difficult a lot of places.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
36,591
10,558
136
It was Trump and Melania right after his closest advisor, Hope Hicks, got sick at a rally. Heard about it around 3AM, which was still yesterday for a lot of the country. Surprised to see posts with no mention since then.
It's happening in P&N.
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,190
845
126
Let's not talk about it anymore in here.
Why? It's non-political and this is still the main Coronavirus thread as far as I am concerned.

Another world leader getting it is definitely worth discussion here and I see no reason to avoid getting political even when discussing his own statements.

For example: During the debate, Trump claimed that there were no issues resulting from his rallies, completely ignoring that another high-profile person, Herman Cain, likely contracted it and died from attending one of his rallies.

Just a relevant, non-political, observation that is worth mentioning, lest anyone take what he said at face-value.
 
Last edited:

Artorias

Golden Member
Feb 8, 2014
1,434
589
136
Why? It's non-political and this is still the main Coronavirus thread as far as I am concerned.

Another world leader getting it is definitely worth discussion.
As with a lot of heated political discussions it would spiral into chaos.

I like this thread because you can get away from all that non-sense, and take in a lot of the good scientific information.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spacehead

Mai72

Lifer
Sep 12, 2012
10,621
1,150
126
Pfizer pushes back on vaccine date. I highly doubt that we are going to see a vaccine by the end of October.

 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
36,591
10,558
136
Bourla always said they expected data in October but also said they would not make the meeting on the 22nd to request an EUA, all but ruling out vaccine deployment by the election. I think maybe EUA for Pfizer in November and Moderna in December if the trials hit the event metrics for infections. We have an assload of virus in the country so it seems doable.
 

Red Squirrel

No Lifer
May 24, 2003
59,683
8,598
126
www.uovalor.com
Well that kind of sucks. Back to not being allowed to see people outside your household.


I hate that they make this province wide when all the new cases are down south. Should be a regional approach to these rules. Thanksgiving is in a week, looks like it will be over zoom lol. I might cheat though, I can always just walk to my sister's place to prevent having another vehicle parked there.
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
84,221
9,044
126
Well that kind of sucks. Back to not being allowed to see people outside your household.


I hate that they make this province wide when all the new cases are down south. Should be a regional approach to these rules. Thanksgiving is in a week, looks like it will be over zoom lol.

Lol how many people do you meet if at all?
 

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,228
136
Pfizer pushes back on vaccine date. I highly doubt that we are going to see a vaccine by the end of October.

I don't understand this pessimism. Having such an extremely contagious virus makes it much easier to quickly see definitive evidence of whether-or-not a vaccine is effective. I think the urgency of the situation demands a massive test size, so we'd know pretty quickly if there are major safety concerns.

With appropriately massive resources devoted to it, there's no reason to expect this vaccine to take longer to develop than vaccines for other viruses that human bodies are capable of fighting off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: K1052

ASK THE COMMUNITY