[QUOTE=Cajundaddy;10836092]Lots of screaming and tantrums by chicken-little types, just zero evidence of this. I have not met anyone economically destroyed by the 6 week staycation yet,



Well good for you, so glad you live in such a nice neat little economic bubble! I DO know somebody getting DESTROYED by this!!! My bro in laws business, 35 employees down to 3...THREE... and there is the REAL possibility he may not come back from this, you think the city will give me a break on my business license?? (10K last year) Think good ole CA will give me a discount on my Property taxes?? Electric?, (his business has pumps etc. that have to run 24 hr. day with or without doors being open) Commercial mortgage?? really?? business insurance?? how about all that FIXED overhead??

like i have said before there has to be some kind of BALANCE, some kind of middle ground, you need to remember for some people its not just a nice little "Staycation"

As I have stated many times, this situation is very complex in my opinion.

We have millions of unemployed people, and despite gubmint and philanthropic activities and actions intended to help, the situation is really really bad. And yes I am affected.

But...

I don't believe that gubmint shelter in place orders have destroyed the economy. I think if the economy is destroyed, the virus did it. He/she is a really dangerous adversary.

Here is something to consider... I posted this before:

If YOU made a model that YOU trusted, and it was informed by data that YOU trusted on what has happened thus far, and YOUR model showed that on June 1, 2021 we'd have:

$3T economic burden ("cost" to US economy) and 1 million deaths without austere measures

OR

$2T economic burden ("cost" to US economy) and 200,00 deaths with austere measures

which would you choose?

Again, not just deaths or death rates, but all of the costs associated with all consequences of this somebeetch virus in both scenarios

and YOUR model.

And by the way, my math skills are just fine. I am sure I could learn more about epidemiology, public health, related economics and so on if I wanted, but I have bigger fish to fry, which includes taking care of my 84 year old mother (via telephone and Zoom) who is ALL alone and 2k miles+ away and grieving for a son she lost suddenly and unexpectedly in December.

And helping to create a new $100 million venture fund and a related consulting business.

But like I said, I would encourage you to create your own model... it just won't be interesting to me if it is solely focused on the premise that all that is being done with "flattening the curve" is giving some older folks more time.

I am not interested in such a narrow perspective, but if that floats your boat then go for it.

There are going to be something like 50x more people who's lives are destroyed economically than those who will die from the virus. Some people will have their lives economically destroyed as well as losing loved ones.

You might want to walk this statement back a bit. It is just that outrageous.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2019/01/11/live-paycheck-to-paycheck-government-shutdown/#7d89dfa34f10

In a hurry for your inheritance? I know, the longer they live the more of YOUR money they piss away on THEIR lives. Just smother them with a pillow if their lives are worthless to you. You’ll be farting in a new Porsche in no time.

50x? Maybe 50,000x who knows?

If the economy is indeed "destroyed" and you believe that there is a mix of "blame" between the virus itself and the gubmint's reaction to the virus, how much "blame" would you give to each? 50-50? 60-40? Or ??

How would you feel if you knew that, without "austere" measures like our highly prevalent shelter in place orders we would have these consequences:

1. Medicare becoming bankrupt by the end of Q2 2020.

2. No choice but to begin to permanently convert to a socialized medicine healthcare system ASAP.

3. 80% of the economic "destruction" we have/anticipate with these austere measures in place. To include vastly more individuals bankrupted by hospital costs due to Covid-19 illness. To include losses to entertainment and service businesses resulting from consumers not electing to consume things like cruises, go on vacations in Vegas, et cetera.

4. A long lasting (say 10+ year) 5-10% reduction of our healthcare workforce due to deaths, morbidity and folks just leaving the healthcare profession

5. Companies like Anthem and United Healthcare going out of business or needing multi-billion dollar bailouts by year-end 2020. Same for many large hospital businesses.

6. Gubmint takeover of companies that make the equipment and supplies needed to combat a much larger number of cases requiring care in hospitals and hospital-like settings. Maybe not permanent, but say for 2-3 years...

And so on.

The full economic burden... not just the deaths.

The bigger picture.

I like to think about the bigger picture. I do not have the answers, but I understand that here is a bigger picture.

Now if we had a communist government, they could have just told us "nothing to worry about." And we could control the media so people couldn't see the people dying.

But we know the virus morbidity and mortality does not care what type of system we have.

And we know that in our system there are costs that can be assigned to both morbidity and mortality, including lost revenues from consumers not consuming since they'd fear the virus.

Folks can decide to ignore the bigger picture-- that is up to individuals. Folks can even claim that there is not a bigger picture. Up to them.

Won't somebody think of the children!?

What is better for children:


$3T economic burden ("cost" to US economy) and 1 million deaths without austere measures

OR

$2T economic burden ("cost" to US economy) and 200,00 deaths with austere measures


Which one?

Your numbers are bull****.

If the states would have forgiven all sales tax, business, property and income taxes during this "lockdown" you would have seen them all open back up after 3 weeks.

Well since roughly 1/2 of Europe closes up shop EVERY SUMMER for 4-6 weeks and none of those businesses are destroyed or even slightly damaged, I am having a really hard time believing that businesses in the greatest economic power on earth will whimper and die out because they are so frail and weak that that they cannot survive one season of same.

A lot of folks are selling, I'm not buying it at all. I think our American businesses are far more effectively managed than that. I think the "Economy is destroyed" crowd are a bunch of Chicken-Little-sky-is-falling losers.

Prove me wrong.

Nah, abortion clinics are still open. The unborn are expendable.

They are not bull***. And they are NOT "my" numbers. Read what I wrote...

what if they were YOUR numbers?

What are your numbers? Do you have any?

All I seem to read about are deaths and death rates.

Do you think that more people would have become infected during the past 60 days if austere measures were not taken? If so, how many more?

If not, why not?

If so, how many of that additional number of individuals would you estimate would require care in hospital and hospital-like settings with HCPS and related equipment and supplies? And what costs would you assign to that care for ALL comers in that increased pool (id est, those that live and survive and those that die)?

If you owned a cruise ship business of say $300M in size, how do you think your business would be affected without austere measures? Do you think you'd have to lay off part of your workforce?

If you owned a restaurant in a city like Sacramento, would your business be affected if austere measures were not in place?

My numbers were meant as an example, and I said so.

What are your numbers? Do you have any?

Or are you focused just on deaths versus economic burden of austere measures?

But those 4-6 weeks bring in tourism dollars. Great for hotels and restaurants and fringe businesses. This lockdown put the nation "dead in the water".

Businesses in Europe plan their year around being closed during those times. Businesses in the US are not. It's that simple. Only the big corporations will survive these lockdowns.

i’m pretty close to being destroyed. if my wife wasn’t working, ide be pretty much destroyed. but, i’m alive and hope to stay that way and i’m willing to go along with this mess a while longer and hope i can find a job when this is “over”

you folks area real sorry lot...

Welcome to the club. You're gonna be crying in your Chile Verde when you have to fight off all the "nouveau" poor people in the thrift stores for shoes, cookware and Draggin Ass jeans....

"Lots of screaming and tantrums by chicken-little types, just zero evidence of this. I have not met anyone economically destroyed by the 6 week staycation yet, you?"

I stopped reading the post after I read this. The part I did read could be the most short-sighted, narrow-minded, self-absorbed declaration of ignorance I have ever read. Almost.

"Staycation"? There are millions of young, hard-working families with kids who have been struggling under enormous debt, week-to-week for years. Some of them were lucky enough or smart enough (doesn't matter which) where this economy finally seemed to be working for them instead of against them. Then this happens. If there ever was a metaphor that fit it would be that these people had the rug pulled out from under them.

What a bone-headed and callous thing to say.

That's totally uncalled for. I thought that you were better than that, but to make a remark like that about someone's opinion is just plain ****ty.

This right here, thank you CB.

If anyone hadn't noticed, the rate of unemployment had been steadily dropping over the last 3 years. People were getting off EBT and entering the workforce. Actually making $$ and feeling good about themselves. This lockdown was a swift kick to the nether regions.

Yup, but that was then and this is now. Thank you hysteria inducing media, and thank you gutless politicians, trying to be so politically correct and fearful of losing your cozy job. Welcome to the long term depression you helped create

I'm not going to take my precious couch time to read this whole thread but I read the OP and it's positing the false premise that only old/infirm people are in danger of dying from this virus. That is completely and demonstrably false. I have two young cousins who have had it, (very healthy 40-somethings who are runners, never smoked, fantastic genetics wrt health, etc.), they survived but their health is probably severely compromised for the rest of their stay on earth.

I don't pretend to have all the answers wrt the response to this pandemic, (unlike the OP), it's a nightmare. A dilemma. Extremely difficult decisions had to be made at some pretty high levels. I'm trusting the health experts over any politician who is not listening to the experts and definitely over random people on the internet.

I don't buy that the economy is permanently hosed, either. I personally lost out on a pretty lucrative opportunity because of this pandemic but I'd rather be alive to cook up another $$ making idea later, myself. :)

Wow, Pelican just hit a new low...

Plus it is planned for (the European summer vacation time).

I don't know anybody in this situation, but there has to be a lot of people/families who are going to have money problems soon, end of stay at home or not.

I have enough Porsches (3) and you could not be more wrong about the rest.

BTW, Just because you can't calmly make a cogent retort doesn't mean you need to get defamatory. You could just STFU.

Exactly. Suddenly CD sounds like a 12-year old on a monthly allowance. No point in wasting any time trying to reason with him.

This is your opinion with none of the medical backing you require.
All these predictions are assumptions. Even the experts change their predictions constantly.
The facts from Italy are that there is a .08% chance of dying below age 50. Let the producers go back to work so the burden can shelter in place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree Island. The virus will flood the globe and by time reach every individual. A bit of hopeful data just came out here in Sweden though. Turns out that in a care home for elderly over 1/3 that tested positiv for the virus had none or very mild symptoms. This hence in a group of the predicted most vulnarable individuals.
Whether a vaccin will make a lot of difference remains to be seen of course.

Thanks livi. That is an interesting bit of information. --over 1/3! Tough Swedes!

One of our 90+ year old residents, of the facility that had all of the US first deaths, survived. Do you have any thoughts on how this happens? Viral loading differences? Genetics? ...

Don't worry, if you go on a ventilator you will be in an induced coma and slip into oblivion. Bad for the family, maybe not so bad for the patient. I was intubated for 24 hours after my cervical spine surgery and did not know a GD thing. The nurses told my wife to go home, because she said "the Macy's parade could walk thru this room and he would know a thing happened".

It seems the patient would not be aware of any distress and go quietly.

Once you go on a ventilator, it's pretty much over from what I've heard. You don't want to go on a ventilator. :(

Death Panels making a comeback I see.

I said the same in response to someone who was fearful of a "suffocating" death.

Not a bad way to go really IMO, all juiced up. Better than the slow death by cancer for sure.

Near me a grandmother, son and grandson are all now short term citizens of this world from the virus.

Here in rural America we have not been hit as hard financially as other parts. I am not sure mostly staying at home has made too much difference, but why take the chance?

First death in the US we know of so far:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/23/us/california-woman-first-coronavirus-death/index.html

Not fake news. Not old or infirm. Colleague of my neighbor.

Speaking as a Dutchman.....when have you ever seen a 4-6 week shutdown of the country?

Has never happened in my lifetime, but I am only 64....

Dennis