I can't understand how people delude themselves into thinking that there would have been no business interruptions and economic hits from not having implemented restrictions. As if the only reason the economy is hurt is because of these restrictions, otherwise it'd have hummed along as usual.
But not having implemented restriction earlier wouldn't have negated the subsequent impact were it not for the lack of appropriate (as opposed to inappropriate) action.
Training Smarter wrote:
It came from a close friend of that family and the LOCAL news, not the national news.
Oh - so local news are not media. It would surprise them to know that. And you don't think their reports would find their way into wider media - if they're proven accurate?
back of the envelope calculations show that the cure is not worse than the disease.
If the quarantines and social distancing measures are effective , an estimated 1,000,000 lives will be saved (1.2 millions deaths down from 2.2 million as predicted by the imperial college of london). The value per life is set around $9,000,000 or $150,000 per life year making the total benefit of the "cure" between $3 trillion and $9 trillion. US GDP is $19.39 trillion. As long as GDP does not fall by more than 15% to 47%, the cure will not be worse than the disease.
Bad Wigins wrote:
Rachel1 wrote:
How much time did you spend composing that nonsense BW?
You generally contribute nothing of note but you’re actually getting worse.
that's literally all you've got. You'll come around.
Some posts deserve proper replies and some deserve ridicule, yours generally fall in that second category.
Rachel1 wrote:
Bad Wigins wrote:
that's literally all you've got. You'll come around.
Some posts deserve proper replies and some deserve ridicule, yours generally fall in that second category.
Nice.
Dril wrote:
The value per life is set around $9,000,000 or $150,000 per life year making the total benefit of the "cure" between $3 trillion and $9 trillion.
I've never seen a value so precisely put on lives.
Of course we all know all lives aren't equal.
That's why the NBA players get tested first. They pull that $9 mil per life average up.
Dril wrote:
back of the envelope calculations show that the cure is not worse than the disease.
If the quarantines and social distancing measures are effective , an estimated 1,000,000 lives will be saved (1.2 millions deaths down from 2.2 million as predicted by the imperial college of london). The value per life is set around $9,000,000 or $150,000 per life year making the total benefit of the "cure" between $3 trillion and $9 trillion. US GDP is $19.39 trillion. As long as GDP does not fall by more than 15% to 47%, the cure will not be worse than the disease.
Now redo those numbers for an average victim age of 70+ and get back to us.
Funny how Liquor and Pot shops are considered essential businesses but the mom and pop shops that aren't peddling addiction get punished?
Darwin12 wrote:
Funny how Liquor and Pot shops are considered essential businesses but the mom and pop shops that aren't peddling addiction get punished?
There are many mom and pop shops open. You're just posting vague nonsense. Some mom and pop shops even sell liquor and pot - shocking!
The Gallant Pig Man wrote:
This is now Republicans versus the Rest of Us.
You think I'm lying? Trump is deliberately withholding unemployment funds and medical supplies from blue states like California, New York, and Washington.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/24/trump-disaster-unemployment-funds-147404He is also making sure that red states get all the medical supplies they request, while blue states do not.
https://www.propublica.org/article/heres-why-florida-got-all-the-emergency-medical-supplies-it-requested-while-other-states-did-notAnd Trump is openly admitting that he is engaging in extortion. He said on Fox, "They have to treat us well also. They can't say, oh gee, we should get this we should get that."
In other words, if Andrew Cuomo isn't willing to lie and say nice things about Donald Trump in public, then Donald Trump is willing screw over millions of ordinary New Yorkers of every political stripe. This is exactly the behavior that got him impeached.
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-suggests-coronavirus-aid-to-governors-that-treat-us-well-2020-3not all lives are valued equally wrote:
Dril wrote:
back of the envelope calculations show that the cure is not worse than the disease.
If the quarantines and social distancing measures are effective , an estimated 1,000,000 lives will be saved (1.2 millions deaths down from 2.2 million as predicted by the imperial college of london). The value per life is set around $9,000,000 or $150,000 per life year making the total benefit of the "cure" between $3 trillion and $9 trillion. US GDP is $19.39 trillion. As long as GDP does not fall by more than 15% to 47%, the cure will not be worse than the disease.
Now redo those numbers for an average victim age of 70+ and get back to us.
the $9M figure is used regardless of age and is common practice. Alternatively it can be calculated per life year - if you assume 10 years of life are saved than the benefit is $1.5T or $3.0T if you assume 20 years.
The Gallant Pig Man wrote: TDS gibberish
You've been shown to be wrong (and quite frankly not very smart) over and over again and yet here you are still posting nonsense...
not all lives are valued equally wrote:
Dril wrote:
back of the envelope calculations show that the cure is not worse than the disease.
If the quarantines and social distancing measures are effective , an estimated 1,000,000 lives will be saved (1.2 millions deaths down from 2.2 million as predicted by the imperial college of london). The value per life is set around $9,000,000 or $150,000 per life year making the total benefit of the "cure" between $3 trillion and $9 trillion. US GDP is $19.39 trillion. As long as GDP does not fall by more than 15% to 47%, the cure will not be worse than the disease.
Now redo those numbers for an average victim age of 70+ and get back to us.
Right, probably around 1-2 Trillion, while the cost already far exceeds this.
Just one of the advantages you get when you are smart enough to pick a winner.
X-Runner wrote:
Dril wrote:
The value per life is set around $9,000,000 or $150,000 per life year making the total benefit of the "cure" between $3 trillion and $9 trillion.
I've never seen a value so precisely put on lives.
Of course we all know all lives aren't equal.
That's why the NBA players get tested first. They pull that $9 mil per life average up.
Ha. I'm guessing there are a lot of things you haven't seen. The sooner you acknowledge that the smarter you'll be.
These are common values used by health insurance companies and non-US governments when determining which treatments they'll pay for and which treatments receive preferred access on prescription insurance plans.
um no wrote:
The Gallant Pig Man wrote: TDS gibberish
You've been shown to be wrong (and quite frankly not very smart) over and over again and yet here you are still posting nonsense...
You have no rebuttal. Why is Trump delaying disaster unemployment assistance? Why are states getting tiny percentages of the medical supplies they urgently need? Why do you think it is okay for the president to explicitly say that states won't get aid unless their governors are nice to him personally? Would love to hear your thoughts, Mr. Big Brain.
Or would you like to go back to making the ludicrous argument that forcing people back to work in the middle of a pandemic will save the economy rather than backfire horribly?
Pot shops are open because that's medicinal.
Booze shops are open because getting many off booze would create medical emergencies, which the system can't deal with right now.
Stimulus checks aren't coming until May. It's not going to help Trump a lot, either way, especially since you're going to see billions going to Wall Street and mismanaged large corporations before then.
Infections may just peak three weeks from now. We could ramp up most states at that point, but an awful lot of people/base voters will be dead. No way around it.
This and other threads are a waste of time. Nobody knows how bad it's going to get, other than very, very bad. All we can do is the right thing, and ride this out.
feef wrote:
A World consumed by fear wrote:
Okay...if you're advocating for long-term "Shelter in Place"/social distancing policy, the government then needs to pay everybody that is laid off their full wages and contributions that they were making to 401ks, insurance plans, etc.,if applicable. Small business owners need to be fully compensated for what their profit margins would yield with customers (one restaurant owner I know in NY that was shutdown said he has over 100 tables and he's at full capacity on weekends).
It doesn't need to do any of those things and, when push comes to shove, it won't be able to.
If you think you're going to be pandered too, think again. People in WW2 lined up to serve for years, and you can't go a couple weeks without access to your overpriced all-day message spas?You'll be given enough resources to live, expenses will be put on hold,and businesses can be compensated for retaining their employees. Don't expect any profits for anything. Time for some hard truths. Man up.
A World consumed by fear wrote:
Furthermore, people suffering from the emotional trauma of isolation need to be compensated for any mental health services needed in either the short or long term. Any health related issues that are the result of isolation requiring treatment needs to compensated by the government. And this includes all children that are being affected by this either mentally or physically.
Yeah, no. People's basic needs will be provided for, some accommodations for access to entertainment and other quality of life services will be maintained, but priorities in who gets access to limited health resources will change to reflect our shared values. If you have a cyst on your arse, you're probably just gonna have to deal with it for a while. Sick grandma takes priority.
This is you:
"Sure, I'd like to see Hitler not win and all, but Imma gonna have to be compensated because people are too busy going to war rather than not being able to serve my particular set of interests."
Stupid responses: comparing a coronavirus with a human threat during WW2? - WTH, have you lost your mind from drowning in fear? 70 Million people died in WW2 - under the worst scenario this virus wouldn't even come close to a tenth of that worldwide. Europeans weren't safe for 6 years of bloody raging war. And yes - people lined up to serve for years and every American made sacrifices during the war effort. But two real enemies threaten to conquered us; Japan in the Pacific theater & the 3rd Reich in the European theater. Every American's life was in danger if we lost the war. To compare the coronavirus with the dynamics of WW2 is being intellectually dishonest.
And I, and many, many others , should expect compensation from this administration that has literally destroyed this economy and the American way of life? The virus destroy the economy they did! Please. The President and his superhero coronavirus task force is so out of tune with crisis. They don't have to worry about losing their jobs. They are financially set for life. They don't have to worry about healthcare needs. They don't have to go cavenging every day for food & supplies amidst empty store shelves. The get to work out in the WH gym (a nice facility paid for by the taxpayers!!!) while the rest of us can't use the gyms/rec centers!
I think you better take a good look at who's making sacrifices and who isn't during this crisis.