Quote:
Originally Posted by island911
Why you came up with the title?
Here is what you said:
Bolded the operative part for ya
|
Appreciate the bold but in your haste to prove how wrong I am you failed to read above
“If you had read my
follow up post, you would have understood why I came up with the title.”
I did not say, In my original post, but in my follow-up post. Hence thank you for proving my point my about comprehension.
So here is my follow-up post since looking it up was evidently too much effort...
Post #80, “The purpose of this thread was a counterpoint to the initial equally dubious assertion that Sweden’s approach was a great success. All we really know is that Sweden’s initial appearance of success was a mirage. How they ultimately fair compared to like Scandinavia countries, only time will tell.”
If you compute death rate in Sweden compared to infections, Sweden has over a 7% Mortality rate compared to a world mortality rate of around 4%. Sweden is doing it right if it means effectively killing off a higher proportion of those infected. If you are talking about the US economy being down the tubes because we didn’t ignore the virus when it first appeared here, 150,000 dead would have been peanuts in comparison. If we don’t hit 200,000 by October using half-@$$ed controls I’ll be very surprised. So what is a fair level of GDP savings compared to ignoring the virus and say having theoretically 500,000 dead now as a result?