The flat curve society would have you think that, however they are not aware of the costs associated with shutting down an economy and destroying civil liberty. It is not lives vs money it is lives vs lives.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Coronavirus
- Thread starter Tigers of Old
- Start date
it is lives vs lives.
Lives now vs lives later which includes the opportunity to save those lives
No one is suggesting that the impact to the economy will be negligible or without suffering
Case count excluding China (7am)
1,605,950 cases
98,862 deaths (6.16%)
49,630 severe (3%)
1,159,692 mild (72%)
297,766 recovered (19%)
1,605,950 cases
98,862 deaths (6.16%)
49,630 severe (3%)
1,159,692 mild (72%)
297,766 recovered (19%)
I shudder to think where we would be now if the states hadn't independently gone much harder on restrictions than the federal government wanted.
Yet Sweden economically are suffering very badly too. They announced a $40bill emergency package. In the end it doesn't matter how long you hold off on the 'destroying' of civil liberties (verb is a bit over the top), eventually the virus will get your country economically, the only difference being the longer you hold off on limiting the spread the more unnecessary deaths you will have incited. And that's coming to roost right now in Sweden.
While anti (flat) curvers ignore the science, and the economic impact having a large percentage of the population away from work sick, of businesses shutting due to deaths, of having hospitals overwhelmed, medical staff ill etc.
Some parts of the stupid media have even costed the economic impact against the deaths we have had, rather than the deaths we would have had.
Has the calculus been done? Or have wide sweeping assumptions been made by the health technocrats that seem to be dictating policy? I dare say health technocrats are not students of economics.
Unfortunately Gia has no suggestion on a solution, other than not what the government is doing. And, any of his suggestions are untestable as they are completely unworkable within the current framework.
I can only imagine the huge increase in death & illness and decimation of the economy if the world proceeded under a business as usual policy. Already the death toll from the virus will exceed the death toll from the flu this year in the states, and that is after they introduced all the measures to reduce the spread. What would the world look like if trade continued as normal?
Perhaps in Gia's magical world people would somehow stem the transmission rates through hand washing and covering their mouth and the virus would disappear within months whilst business continued to thrive.
Early estimations were done and released to the public without context which started the panic buying. Estimations of between 1-2% of the world population would have died if nothing was done. In reality it seems like that may have been on the low end should everyone contract it and with the speed of the spread this likely would have infected billions of people well before any vaccine was found. Whats the economic impact of 10-20m deaths worldwide in a year?? Whats the moral impact of allowing this to happen? I assume you do not have grandparents / parents in the risk profile? Or are you happy to sacrifice them?
I agree a balance should be found and I think we actually probably have the best solution now. It took a while but the jobkeeper payment is certainly a benefit to society and will preserve jobs through this (without a better term) "hibernation" period.
They're up to four with a few more expected from a nursing home.
There are two strains of coronavirus spreading in Australia
Louise Ayling and Joe Pinkstone
Daily Mail Australia
April 11, 2020
Scientists have discovered Australia is in the grips of two different strains of coronavirus.
Cambridge University researchers mapped the genetic history of the infection from December to March and found three distinct, but closely related, variants.
While Australian authorities are struggling to find a cure for the original virus which developed from animals, they're also battling a mutation known as strain C.
Type A is the most prevalent in Australia, however Type C has also been recorded in Sydney, according to the experts.
Analysis of the strains showed type A - the original virus that jumped to humans from bats via pangolins - was not China's most common. Instead, the pandemic's ground-zero was mainly hit by type B, which was in circulation as far back as Christmas Eve.
Type B was also the dominant strain across large parts of the United Kingdom and Europe, but has not made it to Australia.
Type C was an offshoot of Type B, mutating from the secondary strain and spreading to Europe and Australia via Singapore.Scientists believe the virus - officially called SARS-CoV-2 - is constantly mutating to overcome immune system resistance in different populations.
The genetic history of the coronavirus was mapped from December 24 to March 4, revealing three distinct, but closely related, variants. Scientists believe the virus may be constantly mutating to overcome differing levels of immune system resistance in different populations
Pictured, a breakdown of the different coronavirus genomes and to which of the three major group they belong to. The lines indicate a rough split between the type. The larger the circle, the higher the amount of cases
The academics' published work - which has been scrutinised by fellow scientists - only traced the samples of 160 patients across the world, including many of the first cases in Europe and the US.
Methods used to trace the prehistoric migration of ancient humans were adapted to track the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes COVID-19.
The team have now updated their analysis to include more than 1,000 COVID-19 cases up to the end of March to provide a clearer snapshot. It has not yet been peer-reviewed.
The smaller snapshot, published in the journal PNAS, initially suggested that type C was the most common in Europe.
But the data now shows type B is spreading more rampantly - all but one of 31 SARS-CoV-2 samples taken from patients in Switzerland were of the second cluster.
Louise Ayling and Joe Pinkstone
Daily Mail Australia
April 11, 2020
Scientists have discovered Australia is in the grips of two different strains of coronavirus.
Cambridge University researchers mapped the genetic history of the infection from December to March and found three distinct, but closely related, variants.
While Australian authorities are struggling to find a cure for the original virus which developed from animals, they're also battling a mutation known as strain C.
Type A is the most prevalent in Australia, however Type C has also been recorded in Sydney, according to the experts.
Analysis of the strains showed type A - the original virus that jumped to humans from bats via pangolins - was not China's most common. Instead, the pandemic's ground-zero was mainly hit by type B, which was in circulation as far back as Christmas Eve.
Type B was also the dominant strain across large parts of the United Kingdom and Europe, but has not made it to Australia.
Type C was an offshoot of Type B, mutating from the secondary strain and spreading to Europe and Australia via Singapore.Scientists believe the virus - officially called SARS-CoV-2 - is constantly mutating to overcome immune system resistance in different populations.
The genetic history of the coronavirus was mapped from December 24 to March 4, revealing three distinct, but closely related, variants. Scientists believe the virus may be constantly mutating to overcome differing levels of immune system resistance in different populations
Pictured, a breakdown of the different coronavirus genomes and to which of the three major group they belong to. The lines indicate a rough split between the type. The larger the circle, the higher the amount of cases
The academics' published work - which has been scrutinised by fellow scientists - only traced the samples of 160 patients across the world, including many of the first cases in Europe and the US.
Methods used to trace the prehistoric migration of ancient humans were adapted to track the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes COVID-19.
The team have now updated their analysis to include more than 1,000 COVID-19 cases up to the end of March to provide a clearer snapshot. It has not yet been peer-reviewed.
The smaller snapshot, published in the journal PNAS, initially suggested that type C was the most common in Europe.
But the data now shows type B is spreading more rampantly - all but one of 31 SARS-CoV-2 samples taken from patients in Switzerland were of the second cluster.
Let’s assume those projections are correct, what is the effect to lives of implementing the draconian flat curve society rules compared to alternatives?
Stop with the “Do you want to sacrifice them” nonsense, the question is what is the cost of the alternatives. I don’t believe an answer to this was ever considered or could even be properly performed by health technocrats. We could be sacrificing the lives of many more people and potentially those with more life left to live.
This is no alternative. That's why pretty much every western society (and many other) has introduced isolation and distancing rules. The dangerof not doing anything or very little ends up costing the economy far greater. I've heard your alternatives. They don't stack up. The essence of life has nothing to do with the economy, all to do with health. In our own land we have choices. Only those who have fallen for the illness of materialism and greedy capitalism struggle through the current situation. Everyone else will get through this ok. You severely overstate the potential sacrifices. We''e one of the richest, safest countries in the world. Our people live comparably very good lives. We look after each other. We will survive.
South Korea reports recovered coronavirus patients testing positive again
South Korean officials on Friday reported 91 patients thought cleared of the new coronavirus had tested positive again.
mobile.reuters.com
There’s always alternatives, as you yourself just provided in your third sentence. However I have no idea what you are basing that on and I think it very likely the government hasn’t looked at it. You are all taking it for granted.
The ability to provide health services is directly proportional to the level of wealth available. Spending billions to pay people to stay at home and do nothing could alternatively be used to provide health services, saving many many lives.
In our own land we don’t have a choice, the politicians and their health experts control our choices. Save the socialist diatribe and the lie that greed has anything to do with capitalism.
Very well said.
It's my hope that when we are down with this hideous virus people will have learnt to appreciate what is important in life, family and friends.
Guys, stop engaging with Gia. He is a professional troll who wants to derail every thread into a debate about libertarianism. Just let it go otherwise every thread is the same discussion.
