Yes, sally, I would call you a traitor in real life. I use my own name, easy to google, and you are a coward & unregistered foreign agent. Don’t worry, FBI knows you well.
You’re also a whore; tell your niece not to be a whore like you.
Yes, sally, I would call you a traitor in real life. I use my own name, easy to google, and you are a coward & unregistered foreign agent. Don’t worry, FBI knows you well.
You’re also a whore; tell your niece not to be a whore like you.
Spain adds 462 deaths just in the overnight period, half a 24-hour day.
I don't have a lot of faith in Congress' ability to get together and efficiently get money to the right sectors of the economy.
Sending money to everyone or doing special favors for certain industries isn't the best allocation of resources.
If the money sent out is $1 trillion or $2 trillion, that amount needs to be focused on those that cannot go to work because of this crisis.
Imagine if you have a rubber raft with holes all over it and one roll of tape.
Do you distribute the tape thinly and evenly on all parts of the raft or do you only apply tape where the holes are and use all of the tape on just the holes?
One of two things are going to happen:
-They will bicker over the details and delay passing anything.
-They will pass something that doesn't get enough money to the people who need and most and exhaust resources giving money to those who need it less.
Supporters of each party will blame the other party for its failures either way.
The result is going to be that millions will be hurting badly going onto November.
That's never good for the incumbents.
Interesting. Just was reading about Depression. 1930 midterms, ‘pubs lost the House but retained 50-50 in Senate (with VP able to break ties in Hoover’s favor). Of course Hoover would never compromise or even admit there was a Depression.
Just like fat boy & Moscow Mitch.
Just to stir things up here. ;)
The six states with the most COVID cases are all Blue states.
L L wrote:
I don't have a lot of faith in Congress' ability to get together and efficiently get money to the right sectors of the economy.
If recent history repeats, we will see the billionaires get bailed out while regular Americans suffer.
This is why we need Bernie instead of Biden. Maybe if people see that, then there is some hope to revive Bernie's campaign.
Wall St hits new trump low in early trading.
Yonsinglerct wrote:
Just to stir things up here. ;)
The six states with the most COVID cases are all Blue states.
They happen to also be states with high population and pockets of high population density. That's what is driving the numbers in those states. The possible exception is Washington, which has high case counts because the virus took hold earlier.
Yonsinglerct wrote:
Just to stir things up here. ;)
The six states with the most COVID cases are all Blue states.
Those states are more densely populated. Washington, California, New York.
Texas is spread out.
Wyoming, Alaska, Kansas, Nebraska, etc.
I don't think Bernie's campaign will be revived.
And he can't do any rallies now.
Maybe Warren gets to be VP and takes over.
L L wrote:
I don't think Bernie's campaign will be revived.
And he can't do any rallies now.
Maybe Warren gets to be VP and takes over.
You are probably right, but we can hope.
I still think Biden made a deal with Warren to not endorse Bernie. Just call it a hunch, but I think she is indeed the VP pick.
Yonsinglerct wrote:
Just to stir things up here. ;)
The six states with the most COVID cases are all Blue states.
Could that be because they are generally more densely populated? Correlation != causation. Nobody expects Wyoming to have the most COVID cases. You can't get COVID from a sheep.
Trump threatens to end social-distancing guidance. This ought to be fun.
UsedToBeKnowItAll wrote:
Yonsinglerct wrote:
Just to stir things up here. ;)
The six states with the most COVID cases are all Blue states.
Could that be because they are generally more densely populated? Correlation != causation. Nobody expects Wyoming to have the most COVID cases. You can't get COVID from a sheep.
Come on guys. Less rational thought and more tribalism and conspiracy theories.
Thanks, ivan
How’s vlad loving that $25 oil? Russia’s going bankrupt.
jesseriley wrote:
Trump threatens to end social-distancing guidance. This ought to be fun.
He wants to let hundreds of thousands of Americans die for the sake of the economy.
The wealthy must be protected at any cost.
Germany reported 86 deaths...
But sure, it will only be bad in 3 countries...
Spain expects their number of new cases to start decreasing by Wednesday. Their curve is flattening a little but that seems unlikely
Armstronglivs wrote:
P wrote:
I do not agree.
Regardless of whether or not I agree I do not think that it is appropriate here or anywhere else to be making predictions about the chances that the POTUS will be "taken out back and shot." I respectfully request that you refrain from such talk here.
As usual, a humour by-pass.
Fat Hurts is not trying to be humorous in such posts.
And yes, they are inappropriate.
Joe Blow wrote:
P wrote:
US Fatality Rate - A Closer Look
///
From link provided below:
"The case fatality rate (CFR) represents the proportion of cases who eventually die from a disease.
Once an epidemic has ended, it is calculated with the formula: deaths / cases.
But while an epidemic is still ongoing, as it is the case with the current novel coronavirus outbreak, this formula is, at the very least, "naïve" and can be "misleading if, at the time of analysis, the outcome is unknown for a non negligible proportion of patients.
In other words, current deaths belong to a total case figure of the past, not to the current case figure in which the outcome (recovery or death) of a proportion (the most recent cases) hasn't yet been determined.
The correct formula, therefore, would appear to be:
CFR = deaths at day.x / cases at day.x-{T}
(where T = average time period from case confirmation to death)
This would constitute a fair attempt to use values for cases and deaths belonging to the same group of patients.
One issue can be that of determining whether there is enough data to estimate T with any precision, but it is certainly not T = 0 (what is implicitly used when applying the formula current deaths / current cases to determine CFR during an ongoing outbreak)."
They go on to use "a conservative estimate of T = 7 days as the average period from case confirmation to death."
///
Now note the current fatality rate for the US, shown below for cumulative cases/deaths on the dates shown:
Mar 7: 4.5%
Mar 8: 3.8%
Mar 9: 3.5%
Mar 10: 3.1%
Mar 11: 3.0%
Mar 12: 2.5%
Mar 13: 2.2%
Mar 14: 2.0%
Mar 15: 1.8%
Mar 16: 1.8%
Mar 17: 1.7%
Mar 18: 1.6%
Mar 19: 1.5%
Mar 20: 1.3%
Mar 21: 1.3%
Mar 22: 1.3%
Note that the fatality rate shown is a) dropping due to the acceleration of the testing regime and b) is lower than the actual fatality rate comparing a stable cohort of cases with their eventual outcomes (due to lag in deaths vs cases as explained above).
Here I provide an adjusted fatality rate based on the methodology discussed above. I use a more conservative value of T = 5. That is, adjusted fatality rate = (cumulative deaths to date/cumulative cases 5 days ago). With that the numbers look like this:
Adjusted US Fatality Rate (T=5)
Mar 13: 6.9%
Mar 14: 6.3%
Mar 15: 5.8%
Mar 16: 6.1%
Mar 17: 6.0%
Mar 18: 6.7%
Mar 19: 7.2%
Mar 20: 6.8%
Mar 21: 6.5%
Mar 22: 6.5%
Note that with this adjustment the fatality rate is relatively stable around 6 - 7 %. This is likely to be a truer representation of the percentage of diagnosed cases which will ultimately prove to be fatal. Of course, as with all such fatality rates, it refers to the percentage of those diagnosed with COVID-19 rather than the percentage of all individuals who have actually contracted COVID-19.
///
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/#daysI appreciate all of your work on this but there’s just too many asymptomatic celebs/politicians testing positive leading me to believe that millions have COVID-19 and are also asymptomatic. The death rate would be very low if that’s the case.
1) I have made the same observation regarding asymptomatic celebs/politicians.
2) Your statement about a "very low" death rate is not in any way contradictory to the analysis I provided. Please note the following statement from my post above:
"Of course, as with all such fatality rates, it refers to the percentage of those diagnosed with COVID-19 rather than the percentage of all individuals who have actually contracted COVID-19."
There are many concepts being floated around regarding "death rates". The post you reference above is referring to deaths/diagnosed cases prior to the recent massive ramp up in testing. I believe that the numbers I provided will prove to be reasonably accurate as defined.