OT: Corona virus

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Maybe he wants to both increase the death rate to keep the lockdown going, and to eliminate the vulnerable people who use so many state resources. I am sure that some greedy people, if they have immunity, will take the Covid-19 patients.

Doubtful.

He is caught between a rock and a hard place and there is no easy solutions.

I am sure that there are building that could be adapted instead of putting people into existing facilities. Think of a motel or hotel, how much business does it currently have? Or if has recently closed and is not in need of major repairs? those would be better places to open for the Covid-19 patients.

Not so easy to repurpose. Start with carpet being very bad for sterility. Add the lack of separate ventilation for each room. Oxygen? There aren't enough O2 bottles to equip each room and I am not sure ventilators can use them anyway. Power for all the medical devices - heart monitors, ventilators, etc. Enough room around the bed for equipment and a team of medics?

[durnedwolf]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Folks - please tone it down. We all share an interest in the Pacific War, and while we obviously have different political views, we are better than getting into name calling and attacks. According to BBC it is a nice day in London (and hopefully the rest of the UK). It has stopped snowing here in NY. Let's get our walking canes out and go outside, away from computers and TVs......

Oh come on fcooke! It's a bar fight. I'm a gonna wade in and swing my cane about and maybe whack a few folks upside the head. This whole shindig is makin' me feel young again and full of piss-and-vinegar! Heck - afterwards I might even splurge and side up to the bar and get me a Shirley Temple!

(Totally tongue-in-cheek)

Anyone who orders a Shirley Temple should get an automatic 3 month ban from the forum for being underage to post.

Alfred

[:D][:D] Nah - I'm in a 12-step program so a Shirley is about the best I can do. But I appreciate your sentiment. There was a time, many-many moons ago, when I thought a "real man" could drink like a fish and anyone lesser was a panty-waist - lol.

Now - it is what it is.

[fcooke]

My fish still drink like fish.....and a good source of 'supply' should it get to that [:D]

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: obvert

Got it. Sorry if I misunderstood your thinking..


I'm not sure what you mean.

The written word is very hard to communicate effectively with.[:D]

There obviously has been a lot of work done on modeling diseases and their impact on healthcare. However, Ferguson himself says he never thought a lockdown would be initiated in today's world. It was outside of his comprehension.

There was, to my mind, never an analysis of what the effects of a lockdown could be in the rush to prevent a medical collapse the goal was deemed so important as to justify almost any decision. Nothing ever operates in a vacuum, and the law of unintended consequences always rule while another law was broken.

When I was taking a Statistical Class in school long ago, there was a book...about the law of averages. It was a horror story, about what would happen to the world if the law of averages would be broken. And the world pretty much runs on the law of averages...it is in everything we do.

The Lockdown broke the law of averages. What it's outcome will be is absolutely uncertain except to say that the speed of change has accelerated to unbelievable levels.

Just the other day, Gov Cuomo of New York told reporters not to trust the numbers. Wise advice.

I guess I think back to other times and places where a catastrophe has broken systems down. Wars. Famine. Genocide. Financial Crisis. Natural Disaster. Sometimes those went on for a good long time in a specific place, sometimes across the entire planet.

In history so far we've always been able to put things back together, and sometimes quite quickly after a big problem.

If these lockdowns are short enough to just get cases low, begin opening and keep Ro manageable, I think things will gradually get better in a positive feedback loop. The credit system hasn't broken yet, markets are still functioning, if limping, and people in areas with measures in place so far seem able to get enough food, medicine and medical help to get through this first bit.

I'm in the optimistic camp. I think the economy will recover this year and if a second wave can be avoided in the fall, even unemployment will bounce back soon to under 10%. Some businesses will fail, but others will start. Some big businesses (Amazon) will get bigger. Some very rich will get richer. I do hope though that the most vulnerable people on the lowest end of the employment ladder will be able to make ends meet and get jobs. My worry is for those people.

It is a question of perspective.

My mother-in-law, if she was still alive, would have slapped you for suggesting that we were able to put things back together quickly...with respect to the great depression or the inflation of the 70s. Reuse, repair or do without, and sometime in the 70s she added recycle. A mindset that is totally alien to almost everyone alive today in the US.

Nothing wrong with being an optimist.[:)]

[Alfred]

Too many economic illiterate people posting in this thread.
 
Income will not quickly recover fully and that will directly feed into suppressing aggregate demand.
 
1.  Some parts of the economy will witnessed an explosion in inventory numbers.  Two major ones are oil and aircraft.
 
The reason why oil futures recently went into negative te4rritory was not primarily due to production but a lack of oil storage facilities.  The substantial downturn in oil demand combined with the continued production means that oil inventories are high.  People forget that the northern summer season witnesses a drop in oil demand so they're aren't coming down soon.  Even the total collapse of the North American fracking industry won't bring supply into equilibrium with demand.
 
There will be airline collapses, it is just a matter of time.  Even without them, there is an absolute glut of parked aircraft.  It costs a lot of money every single day to have a parked aircraft.  This will result in two bad outcomes.  It will see the market for new aircraft destroyed as everyone will be trying to off load their parked aircraft.  Very bad news for Boeing and Airbus and all their component supplies.  The employment knock on effect will be huge.  Nor will the aircraft leasing companies come through unscathed.
 
2.  The airline downturn will not just be the result of the collapse of international air travel for the foreseeable future, it directly disrupts the supply chain.  It isn't just international tourists who are aren't going anywhere and that has very significant employment and income repercussions on many economies, international air freight is largely kaput too.  That has serious repercussions on trade and production which of course reduces international income.
 
3.  Even were the lockdowns totally removed today, most companies are going to experience a minimum of 2 quarters ( the past quarter and the current quarter) of depressed earnings.  My money is that  earnings will not recover before Q4 in 2021.  At some stage, the depressed earnings will result in reduced dividends.  that will have repercussions on 401 schemes and shareholder incomes.
 
4.  Most business fixed costs are still incurred during the lockdown.  Lost business income is just that, lost.  Removal of lockdowns will, at the absolute best if one is an optimist, see demand recover to former levels.  It wont exceed past levels which leaves a significant period with lost demand.  Those inventories will take some time to reduce, and then by reducing forward orders to producers.  Again diminishing future income levels.
 
Government budgets, ahh I won't even touch them now but there is a world of future pain being stored up.
 
Alfred 

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

State Ready To Pay Assisted Living Facilities To Take Coronavirus Patients

https://www.kpbs.org/news/2020/may/06/s ... ronavirus/

California is the state.

This looks ridiculous. So far it has seemed CA was doing well and making solid decisions. There have to be other ways to care for these patients than to put other very vulnerable people in danger. Isn't isloation the idea.

How about paying that money to a small hotel in each area and booking out all of the rooms, hiring a few attendants from laid off medical professionals, and putting reasonable numbers thee until they again test negative? Is it really so hard to find another way to take care of these people?

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: Lowpe



Doubtful.

He is caught between a rock and a hard place and there is no easy solutions.

I am sure that there are building that could be adapted instead of putting people into existing facilities. Think of a motel or hotel, how much business does it currently have? Or if has recently closed and is not in need of major repairs? those would be better places to open for the Covid-19 patients.

Not so easy to repurpose. Start with carpet being very bad for sterility. Add the lack of separate ventilation for each room. Oxygen? There aren't enough O2 bottles to equip each room and I am not sure ventilators can use them anyway. Power for all the medical devices - heart monitors, ventilators, etc. Enough room around the bed for equipment and a team of medics?

I have been in an assisted living facility that used to be a motel. No need for O2 bottles unless the people need them. The other equipment that you state are for a hospital, not an assisted living facility. Maybe not even a nursing home. I have been in one of those as well.

Remember, these facilities would be for those recovering who are mildly affected.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Too many economic illiterate people posting in this thread.

Income will not quickly recover fully and that will directly feed into suppressing aggregate demand.

1.  Some parts of the economy will witnessed an explosion in inventory numbers.  Two major ones are oil and aircraft.

The reason why oil futures recently went into negative te4rritory was not primarily due to production but a lack of oil storage facilities.  The substantial downturn in oil demand combined with the continued production means that oil inventories are high.  People forget that the northern summer season witnesses a drop in oil demand so they're aren't coming down soon.  Even the total collapse of the North American fracking industry won't bring supply into equilibrium with demand.

There will be airline collapses, it is just a matter of time.  Even without them, there is an absolute glut of parked aircraft.  It costs a lot of money every single day to have a parked aircraft.  This will result in two bad outcomes.  It will see the market for new aircraft destroyed as everyone will be trying to off load their parked aircraft.  Very bad news for Boeing and Airbus and all their component supplies.  The employment knock on effect will be huge.  Nor will the aircraft leasing companies come through unscathed.

2.  The airline downturn will not just be the result of the collapse of international air travel for the foreseeable future, it directly disrupts the supply chain.  It isn't just international tourists who are aren't going anywhere and that has very significant employment and income repercussions on many economies, international air freight is largely kaput too.  That has serious repercussions on trade and production which of course reduces international income.

3.  Even were the lockdowns totally removed today, most companies are going to experience a minimum of 2 quarters ( the past quarter and the current quarter) of depressed earnings.  My money is that  earnings will not recover before Q4 in 2021.  At some stage, the depressed earnings will result in reduced dividends.  that will have repercussions on 401 schemes and shareholder incomes.

4.  Most business fixed costs are still incurred during the lockdown.  Lost business income is just that, lost.  Removal of lockdowns will, at the absolute best if one is an optimist, see demand recover to former levels.  It wont exceed past levels which leaves a significant period with lost demand.  Those inventories will take some time to reduce, and then by reducing forward orders to producers.  Again diminishing future income levels.

Government budgets, ahh I won't even touch them now but there is a world of future pain being stored up.

Alfred 

+1

This is not to mention the businesses are are based on seasonal revenues such as fishing resorts, restaurants and hotels/motels in the tourist towns, plus all of the other associated businesses there.

Future pain in the budgets, think of not increases taxes but reducing spending to reduce the money supply to lessen inflation.

Think of the farmers with their fruits and vegetables that need to be taken care of and harvested. If that is not done, then there will be a shortage of those. Grains should not be a problem since that is not as intensive, manpower wise.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

State Ready To Pay Assisted Living Facilities To Take Coronavirus Patients

https://www.kpbs.org/news/2020/may/06/s ... ronavirus/

California is the state.

This looks ridiculous. So far it has seemed CA was doing well and making solid decisions. There have to be other ways to care for these patients than to put other very vulnerable people in danger. Isn't isloation the idea.

How about paying that money to a small hotel in each area and booking out all of the rooms, hiring a few attendants from laid off medical professionals, and putting reasonable numbers thee until they again test negative? Is it really so hard to find another way to take care of these people?

I agree. If you see my post, you will notice that.

All that you need is an RN/LPN on duty passing medications and Certified Nursing assistants to help. Or even just a home healthcare aide with a nurse on call.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


It is a question of perspective.

My mother-in-law, if she was still alive, would have slapped you for suggesting that we were able to put things back together quickly...with respect to the great depression or the inflation of the 70s. Reuse, repair or do without, and sometime in the 70s she added recycle. A mindset that is totally alien to almost everyone alive today in the US.

Nothing wrong with being an optimist.[:)]

I lived with my grandmother from age 5 to 12 after my parents split. She was born in 1912 and went through the depression in her prime years of marriage and having kids. When I lived with her nearly half a century later she was still hoarding canned foods, clipping coupons, saying nearly everything she could use, sewing her own clothes and mending mine. She was the most positive person I have ever been around, and she knew how to have some fun.

So this is not alien to me, unfortunately. I still struggle not to "collect" too many interesting things I might use later, or scraps I could make into something else. I've just been remaking my garden shed and I took out a greenhouse. I sat on the glass for a long time, not knowing how I'd use it. I ended up raising the roof to put a clear-story in and learned to put glass, rout window frames and install them up high to give more light into the two rooms.

Just this week I cut down some of the excess to be recycled, but still kept eight sheets in case I need them. Silly, but it's my grandma in me.

[Canoerebel]

Hey, Wuffer, thanks.

To clarify something you said below, I didn't suggest dividing Germany into states. To take that one step further, I haven't offered suggestions about any other countries. My comments have been limited to the US.

I mention that only because there have been many times here, due to volume of posts, that forumites may have misaligned posts with posters. I know of two other instances that's happened to me.

Y'all have a good day. I'm off for a couple of days to visit family. No internet or media until I get back.

ORIGINAL: Wuffer



No need to apologize, CR, please.
It's over a decade now that I follow your adventures and while we would probably disagree on a lot of political issues I am very fine with this, as I have never been in the States and therefore a bit reluctant to spread advise over the pond.
In this context I might add that any supposed 'hate' against the American people is comically exaggerated from our side, not to say borderline propaganda with an obvious aim to divide.

But you get what you pay for, as we are both publishers we know that good, as objective as possible journalism can't be made for free, so it isn't astonishing at all to realize how much free stuff in the Internet is a best clickbait or sometimes driven by a hidden agenda.

Haha, your idea to divide Germany into a system of federal states was great, allthough some folks may argue we had been grow a little bit to fat in the last time

Good luck to everyone,
especially best wishes for everyone with kids - you have my support in this times.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: obvert


There are no digs. The personnel stuff is because I'm fed up with the BS you and others throw ardour at anyone who presents something slightly different than your world view, and is met with outrage without any foundation in fact. My default is to look widely for expert advice, objective information and base my posts on the best science has to offer in the moment. There are no politics in that, no agenda, just trying to understand.

This is objective information I'm getting from sources that are verified. How do you explain what Fauci said in this interview?

Have a look. One week to have 60% less deaths in this phase. Two weeks earlier to have 90% less. Even if there is some error margin in those projections, I'd certainly take 40-50% less deaths. Wouldn't you?

I posted Fauci's own comments quite a while back. CNN asked a hypothetical question, then used his answer far, far out of context. You cite an NYT article which compounds the same untruth. When one lies and the other swears to it, well, I guess you are right - that's verified!

You present the hypothetical as though fact. I presented that which has actually happened and you call it "without any foundation in fact".

Bye.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


After recent events, my interest was taken with the decision making at the top levels of US government.

From this, and the recent interaction between Trump and Dr Brix, I am of the opinion that Fauci, Brix (and likely anyone else involved in the process) would say the sky is green if it kept Trump on side.

Trump's comments (well, tweets) on the subject are in the public domain.

If you read those comments as the comments of a leader that takes the situation and the advice seriously, then perhaps get your eyes tested.

I understand and agree that is a possibility, but I don't think so. For one thing, I don't think any such thing would keep Trump on side.

Trump is quite unusual, that's for sure. His manner of lashing out is probably not unique among US Presidents (thinking of Andrew Jackson for one example), but now we have Twitter, etc.

[Cap Mandrake]

Airlines, airplane manufacture, tourism, AirBNB rentals, cruise ships [:D], restaurants, public school employees, universities. It's a catastrophe. Then you have the secondary effects on consumer spending like the Sage of AE just said..real estate, autos,vacations (again), dishwashers, $20K Nancy Pelosi style fridges.

The list is endless. We might have another generation of soap and food horders.

[Canoerebel]

Mind_Messing offers the kind of contemptuous analysis that we've discussed the past week or so. He believes in his positions passionately but expresses himself in a manner that is off-putting ("get your eyes tested" and many, many other statements) to those Americans who support Trump. They support him for diverse, disparate reasons, ranging from the Supreme Court to deeply held Pro-Life convictions to opposition to liberal ideologies to a distaste for the smug eliteness that too often permeates the left ("Deplorables," etc.). If the left really wants to beat Trump, they'd be better served by not continuously overplaying their hands, driving swing voters and swing states to the Red. Democrat strategist James Carville had it exactly right in February, as quoted in here the middle of last week. Smugness and contemptuousness are remarkably irritating.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Mind_Messing offers the kind of contemptuous analysis that we've discussed the past week or so. He believes in his positions passionately but expresses himself in a manner that is off-putting ("get your eyes tested" and many, many other statements) to those Americans who support Trump. They support him for diverse, disparate reasons, ranging from the Supreme Court to deeply held Pro-Life convictions to opposition to liberal ideologies to a distaste for the smug eliteness that too often permeates the left ("Deplorables," etc.). If the left really wants to beat Trump, they'd be better served by not continuously overplaying their hands, driving swing voters and swing states to the Red. Democrat strategist James Carville had it exactly right in February, as quoted in here the middle of last week. Smugness and contemptuousness are remarkably irritating.

My stepmother had a sister-in-law who put it quite nicely and she was very polite about it too. She said "If people think that their $hit is cream, they should try it on their peaches."

[durnedwolf]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Mind_Messing offers the kind of contemptuous analysis that we've discussed the past week or so. He believes in his positions passionately but expresses himself in a manner that is off-putting ("get your eyes tested" and many, many other statements) to those Americans who support Trump. They support him for diverse, disparate reasons, ranging from the Supreme Court to deeply held Pro-Life convictions to opposition to liberal ideologies to a distaste for the smug eliteness that too often permeates the left ("Deplorables," etc.). If the left really wants to beat Trump, they'd be better served by not continuously overplaying their hands, driving swing voters and swing states to the Red. Democrat strategist James Carville had it exactly right in February, as quoted in here the middle of last week. Smugness and contemptuousness are remarkably irritating.

I would say this:

There is a broad spectrum of people who are Republicans, leaning from the ultra-conservative far-far right, to middle of the road to a leftish-quasi Democrat point of view. In truth, I think the only reason Trump won was because so many people hated Hillary...

That same wide spectrum exists for the Democrats: Right, middle, left.

And then there are many that are independent and they don't tie themselves down too tightly to one side or the other.

I think your comments have crossed the line and you should back the hell off. Just because someone is an a$$ does not mean you need to lower your values to get down on their level.

[durnedwolf]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Too many economic illiterate people posting in this thread.

Income will not quickly recover fully and that will directly feed into suppressing aggregate demand.

1.  Some parts of the economy will witnessed an explosion in inventory numbers.  Two major ones are oil and aircraft.

The reason why oil futures recently went into negative te4rritory was not primarily due to production but a lack of oil storage facilities.  The substantial downturn in oil demand combined with the continued production means that oil inventories are high.  People forget that the northern summer season witnesses a drop in oil demand so they're aren't coming down soon.  Even the total collapse of the North American fracking industry won't bring supply into equilibrium with demand.

There will be airline collapses, it is just a matter of time.  Even without them, there is an absolute glut of parked aircraft.  It costs a lot of money every single day to have a parked aircraft.  This will result in two bad outcomes.  It will see the market for new aircraft destroyed as everyone will be trying to off load their parked aircraft.  Very bad news for Boeing and Airbus and all their component supplies.  The employment knock on effect will be huge.  Nor will the aircraft leasing companies come through unscathed.

2.  The airline downturn will not just be the result of the collapse of international air travel for the foreseeable future, it directly disrupts the supply chain.  It isn't just international tourists who are aren't going anywhere and that has very significant employment and income repercussions on many economies, international air freight is largely kaput too.  That has serious repercussions on trade and production which of course reduces international income.

3.  Even were the lockdowns totally removed today, most companies are going to experience a minimum of 2 quarters ( the past quarter and the current quarter) of depressed earnings.  My money is that  earnings will not recover before Q4 in 2021.  At some stage, the depressed earnings will result in reduced dividends.  that will have repercussions on 401 schemes and shareholder incomes.

4.  Most business fixed costs are still incurred during the lockdown.  Lost business income is just that, lost.  Removal of lockdowns will, at the absolute best if one is an optimist, see demand recover to former levels.  It wont exceed past levels which leaves a significant period with lost demand.  Those inventories will take some time to reduce, and then by reducing forward orders to producers.  Again diminishing future income levels.

Government budgets, ahh I won't even touch them now but there is a world of future pain being stored up.

Alfred 

Yup - I think you are right and this is gonna hurt really-really bad.

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: fcooke

My fish still drink like fish.....and a good source of 'supply' should it get to that [:D]

There are two movies scenes, both involving Humphrey Bogart, which I find very relevant to this.

1. The Maltese Falcon. The "Fat Man" offers Sam Spade a drink. When the offer is accepted the "Fat Man" says with approval "Good. Never trust a man who doesn't drink".

2. The Big Sleep. Philip Marlowe is in the hothouse with the Colonel. Marlowe accepts a drink and is looked on enviously by the Colonel who explains that nowadays he drinks vicariously.

Absolutely no Shirley Temples involved in either scene, just neat spirit, bourbon IIRC. Ah those were the days when Americans drank bourbon neat, not the hipster craft beers in Irish pubs of today, pre lockdown of course.

Alfred

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: fcooke

My fish still drink like fish.....and a good source of 'supply' should it get to that [:D]

There are two movies scenes, both involving Humphrey Bogart, which I find very relevant to this.

1. The Maltese Falcon. The "Fat Man" offers Sam Spade a drink. When the offer is accepted the "Fat Man" says with approval "Good. Never trust a man who doesn't drink".

2. The Big Sleep. Philip Marlowe is in the hothouse with the Colonel. Marlowe accepts a drink and is looked on enviously by the Colonel who explains that nowadays he drinks vicariously.

Absolutely no Shirley Temples involved in either scene, just neat spirit, bourbon IIRC. Ah those were the days when Americans drank bourbon neat, not the hipster craft beers in Irish pubs of today, pre lockdown of course.

Alfred

Hammett and Chandler. LA vs San Francisco. I think I liked the Continental Op best, short and pudgy for the time. Of course, you can't talk drinking without mentioning the Thin Man. Staggering amounts of drinking.[:)]