Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-18-2020, 01:55 PM
Leaper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In my own little world...
Posts: 12,764

How long/much of a lockdown will people tolerate?


I just read an opinion on Reddit by a doctor (not an epidemiologist or anything like that, though) that an effective curve-flattening social distancing mandate in the United States would have to last for months, like five or six, maybe longer, to really be most effective in saving lives. He pretty much dismissed the economic and social implications of this as not his department, but for the people who would have to enforce such a thing, it very rightly is.

Even with some countries paying most of an employee’s salary to stay home, I don’t see how a half-year or longer shutdown would be tolerated anywhere. Which made me wonder: what’s the maximum governments (both the United States and elsewhere) would be able to maintain quarantine/lockdown/shelter in place conditions currently being done? What is the political and social will to do it again later if it becomes necessary, and how long after the current one would such be feasible? What would governments have to do it make it more feasible?
  #2  
Old 03-18-2020, 02:15 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 13,192
At 6 months there would be more people starving to death than dying from the virus. (And maybe at 2 months.)
  #3  
Old 03-18-2020, 02:20 PM
RickJay is online now
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 42,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaper View Post
I just read an opinion on Reddit by a doctor (not an epidemiologist or anything like that, though) that an effective curve-flattening social distancing mandate in the United States would have to last for months, like five or six, maybe longer, to really be most effective in saving lives. He pretty much dismissed the economic and social implications of this as not his department, but for the people who would have to enforce such a thing, it very rightly is.
This crossed my mind when someone repeated the (false) rumor that they were going to announce an 18-month shutdown.

I do not think society would tolerate a shutdown of six months; it's unlikely the economy could function that long with most people unable to work. Long before that, people would start coming out anyway. Everyone's different, but after six weeks most people are going to say "the hell with this."

We are still ramping upward in terms of people's fear and willingness to place the coronavirus scare at the top of their priority list. But as they get more and more stir crazy, and less and less worried about COVID-19 - esoecially given that for the vasy majority of folks they will be sitting around not getting it and not seeing it - and they will insist on going out.

Small businesses will, unless forced to by law, open up when it's that or bankruptcy.

There is a point at which people will be willing to accept a degree of risk of getting COVID-19. I think that point's way before six months.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!

Last edited by RickJay; 03-18-2020 at 02:23 PM.
  #4  
Old 03-18-2020, 02:52 PM
AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
I do not think society would tolerate a shutdown of six months; it's unlikely the economy could function that long with most people unable to work. Long before that, people would start coming out anyway. Everyone's different, but after six weeks most people are going to say "the hell with this."
AGreed. After a few weeks 6-8 people will say 'you know what, let's take our chance with the virus. People are being asked to hold their breath. There is a limit to how long that can be done.
  #5  
Old 03-18-2020, 02:53 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,759
There are other ways of approaching this through regulation without enduring a total lock down for 6 months.

When gas rationing was implemented in the early 70s, the government immediately imposed an even/odd day assignment for when people could get fuel refills.

The same sort of thing could work for grocery shopping and such, say people whose last names start with A-D can replenish their provisions on Mondays, E-H on Tuesdays, etc. Something like that.

The idea right now is to give experts an opportunity to work out how best to approach the situation over the long haul and buy time to work on a vaccine.

I do fear a day when a certain libertarian-minded segment of the population decides, oh, fuck all you old people, just catch this thing, die and let the rest of us get on with our lives. I can easily imagine this approach becoming acceptable to some.
  #6  
Old 03-18-2020, 03:00 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 13,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
The same sort of thing could work for grocery shopping and such, say people whose last names start with A-D can replenish their provisions on Mondays, E-H on Tuesdays, etc. Something like that.
Bought with what money?
  #7  
Old 03-18-2020, 03:15 PM
Joey P is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 30,010
Implementing a rationing system might give stores a fighting chance of staying stocked, but I'm not entirely sure it would keep the virus from spreading.

As for people getting stir crazy after a few weeks and 'taking their chances', well, no one is requiring them to remain locked inside their houses, they are free to roam all they want. The problem is there's no where to go. What you'd have to do is convince businesses to open back up and take their chances, not with the virus, but with their municipalities. If a city decided to fine places that remain open or not renew their licenses then what?

Having said that, I think, if it's not resolved by mid-summer, the people will start putting a lot more pressure on the government to figure something out. They're not going to want their kids to continue missing school and a lot of people will long since have run out of money and will need to go back to work.

In a perfect world, we'll have a vaccine for this sooner rather than later. Schools can/should implement a zero tolerance* requirement that all returning students must get this vaccine (and maybe the flu vaccine as well) before returning. Employers would have the option but it should be strongly recommended that they require employees to it as well.

*Zero-tolerance, but within reason. If you're allergic, don't get it but no more of this autism bs.
  #8  
Old 03-18-2020, 04:02 PM
RioRico is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 2,388
IMHO people will tolerate enforced lockdowns until supplies run out. Then more force will be needed. That'll be bad.
  #9  
Old 03-18-2020, 04:12 PM
Musicat is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 21,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darren Garrison View Post
At 6 months there would be more people starving to death than dying from the virus. (And maybe at 2 months.)
For now, at least in my area, grocery stores and takeout restaurants are not closed, although they have limited hours and facilities, and are encouraging delivery as an alternative to pickup.
  #10  
Old 03-18-2020, 04:48 PM
Babale is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
I do fear a day when a certain libertarian-minded segment of the population decides, oh, fuck all you old people, just catch this thing, die and let the rest of us get on with our lives. I can easily imagine this approach becoming acceptable to some.

That day was yesterday:


Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
The issue I have is that in The Stand, the Captain Trips virus actually killed 99% of people and everyone who got it; the survivors simply had an immunity to it. I understand the extreme measure for that.

For this we are wrecking the economy and people's lives for a disease that the vast majority of people survive without the need for any medical attention at all.
  #11  
Old 03-18-2020, 04:50 PM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,397
In theory, since the disease is supposedly spread via respiration, would mandating everyone wear an n95 type mask while in public reduce the disease r0 to more manageable levels?
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #12  
Old 03-18-2020, 04:57 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 13,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
For now, at least in my area, grocery stores and takeout restaurants are not closed, although they have limited hours and facilities, and are encouraging delivery as an alternative to pickup.
You are looking at this (and I hold my nose over Speaking Woke) from a place of privilege. I'm not talking about restaurants not being open, I am talking about people not getting paid for months. For some Americans, that means saying "Gee, I'm going to have to dip into my savings." For millions more, it means saying "Gee, I'm going to have to die from starvation."
  #13  
Old 03-18-2020, 05:37 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,759
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darren Garrison View Post
Bought with what money?
A very valid concern and should be top of mind for government to address. My hope is that unemployment benefits are extended liberally to all persons laid off through no fault of their own.

However, please understand my post was primarily directed at the effect of quarantine over a lengthy period. I was not trying to solve every serious problem presented by this crisis, only the one posed by the OP.
  #14  
Old 03-18-2020, 07:00 PM
RickJay is online now
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 42,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
I do fear a day when a certain libertarian-minded segment of the population decides, oh, fuck all you old people, just catch this thing, die and let the rest of us get on with our lives. I can easily imagine this approach becoming acceptable to some.
If you make people stay inside for too long, it's not going to be a matter of "libertarianism," it's going to be a matter of people just valuing getting outside and working so they don't starve more than protecting themselves from the virus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey P
Having said that, I think, if it's not resolved by mid-summer, the people will start putting a lot more pressure on the government to figure something out.
The situation is it exists will not be tolerated that long. There will be a critical mass of really pissed off people long before mid-summer.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #15  
Old 03-18-2020, 07:17 PM
Leaper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In my own little world...
Posts: 12,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
If you make people stay inside for too long, it's not going to be a matter of "libertarianism," it's going to be a matter of people just valuing getting outside and working so they don't starve more than protecting themselves from the virus.


The situation is it exists will not be tolerated that long. There will be a critical mass of really pissed off people long before mid-summer.
How much time do you think the “government pays 90% of your lost salary” benefit being initiated by some other countries buys? Note that I’ve only heard about it; I have no idea about practical limits or anything.
  #16  
Old 03-18-2020, 07:21 PM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 31,008
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioRico View Post
IMHO people will tolerate enforced lockdowns until supplies run out. Then more force will be needed. That'll be bad.
But the lockdown will come with a free frogurt. That's good.
  #17  
Old 03-18-2020, 07:25 PM
D'Anconia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darren Garrison View Post
Bought with what money?
From their emergency fund. If they don't have one, they are living beyond their means.
  #18  
Old 03-18-2020, 07:56 PM
RickJay is online now
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 42,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaper View Post
How much time do you think the “government pays 90% of your lost salary” benefit being initiated by some other countries buys? Note that I’ve only heard about it; I have no idea about practical limits or anything.
An extra month? That kinda money ain't gonna last long; even governments run out eventually, and money is a representation of wealth. We need food and stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia
From their emergency fund. If they don't have one, they are living beyond their means.
I'm glad you're doing well, but some people aren't and the reason isn't relevant.

Either people are going to go back to work or society's going to fall apart. Those are your choices. The point at which that decision has to be made is sooner than six months from now. There is a point at which people will be willing to risk COVID-19 and for the overwhelming majority, that point is long before September 18.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #19  
Old 03-18-2020, 10:12 PM
Babale is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,176
How screwed do you think the economy would be if we didn't shut down and just went about our lives, leading to a predicted 2 to 4 million deaths and 20% of the population at least catching this?

Social distancing is the ONLY solution. We will get as much work done as possible using skeleton crews working far apart, cycled shifts with sanitation in between, and remote work wherever remotely possible. But the economic damage from NOT taking drastic action would be devastating.
  #20  
Old 03-18-2020, 10:15 PM
Babale is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,176
If people simply go back to work society will fall apart anyways, AND millions will die.
  #21  
Old 03-18-2020, 10:56 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 13,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
From their emergency fund. If they don't have one, they are living beyond their means.
Thank you Ms. Antoinette.
  #22  
Old 03-18-2020, 10:59 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 13,192
BTW, that describes only a mere 78 percent of Americans.
  #23  
Old 03-19-2020, 03:27 AM
UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 16,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
That day was yesterday:
Yeah, that's great. I know you had to take a shot at me, but if you have read any of my posts that is not what I am saying at all.

What I am addressing is exactly what this thread is addressing. A month's long lockdown is simply unrealistic and any "flattening the curve" plan that requires healthy people to lose their jobs, their savings, and live life where things are shut down for an extended period of time will simply not work without the most draconian military measures and even then things will only be worse when people start shooting back.

Note that I will not be shooting back, but that is the problem with any of these "solutions." They are all "People must do X; People must do Y." Well, if we have learned anything from human history is that "people" will look out for their own selfish interests unless given an overwhelming reason to do otherwise.

Take WWII; that generation made huge sacrifices so that the next generation could live in a world free from tyranny. If you tell people that their own lives must be wrecked so that sick old people might have a bit better chance of surviving this disease and give them maybe a year or two more, well, it doesn't matter what Ultravires personally thinks and you can take shots at me on here all you want. Any planning must take into account what "people" will think.

And any plan that says we have to continue with what we are doing for six months simply will not work. So shake your head and rend your garments about how terribly selfish people are while the world crumbles around you. I'm trying to be realistic in a world where no politician, Dem or Republican, wants to level with people and tell them that barring some miracle breakthrough in treatment, some tough choices will have to be made.
  #24  
Old 03-19-2020, 03:35 AM
UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 16,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
From their emergency fund. If they don't have one, they are living beyond their means.
And how long do you think it will be before people who don't have emergency funds find out that you do and come to your door asking for help? How much longer after that will they no longer be asking?
  #25  
Old 03-19-2020, 03:47 AM
Locrian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 4,537
Got more liquor today! Not much good food, though. Can't even find Tina's Burritos!

So I'm personally worried about a lockdown, or a stay-at-home order or whatever is close to that. I live alone, work from home (thank goodness), but if I really need something, like more food or medicine, we may be screwed on that portion. I also planned to visit family next month, but now, how? I'd have to fly in to NY or MD, get tested. If negative, drive north or south to see mom in NJ. If positive, I'm stuck in one of my sibling's places till it passes.

So many others are missing out on family care/visits. Our numbers are up, as expected, and I'm also afraid of a panic. If it's announced we have to lockdown in L.A., people will freak before it is made official. Uuuuuggggghhh!!
  #26  
Old 03-19-2020, 04:00 AM
AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
From their emergency fund. If they don't have one, they are living beyond their means.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
And how long do you think it will be before people who don't have emergency funds find out that you do and come to your door asking for help? How much longer after that will they no longer be asking?
Much more to the point, you cannot eat cash and a credit card. What they can do is be exchanged for goods and services. As those start to become unavailable.... and with a lockdown thats going to happen, just what are you going to do.

Admittedly paper money might come in useful in some circumstances.
  #27  
Old 03-19-2020, 05:22 AM
UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 16,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK84 View Post
Much more to the point, you cannot eat cash and a credit card. What they can do is be exchanged for goods and services. As those start to become unavailable.... and with a lockdown thats going to happen, just what are you going to do.

Admittedly paper money might come in useful in some circumstances.
I have not even heard rumors along the lines of a restrictive lockdown like that. Even in those places that are instituting what they call a "lockdown" or a "shelter in place" people are permitted to go to work in essential industries and can leave to go to the grocery store. That would be impossible. Too many people live in urban areas and cannot just go shoot a deer for food. You would have mass starvation if you did not allow the food industry to remain and the grocery stores to stay open.

The only possible way that money could become worthless (and if that happens, it is really Lord of the Flies time) is if this goes on for years and people start believing that the government's money is tremendously overvalued based upon the few goods and services that remain available.
  #28  
Old 03-19-2020, 06:38 AM
HMS Irruncible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
I do not think society would tolerate a shutdown of six months; it's unlikely the economy could function that long with most people unable to work. Long before that, people would start coming out anyway. Everyone's different, but after six weeks most people are going to say "the hell with this."
Psychologicially, I agree a lot of people will reach a tipping point after a couple of months. I reached mine after 2 days isolation with my family.

But much of what we're calling "lockdown" is just private business limiting their liability and responding to reduced public demand. What are these cranky uncles to do? Bang on the doors of the NFL and demand that football season start on time? Threaten the bankrupted restaurants with a boycott if they don't reopen? Send bomb threats to the school district if they don't resume the school year? How can we see a wave of 9/11-like patriotic shopping when all the brick-and-mortar stores are bankrupt and everyone is broke?

I imagine there will be some unfortunate scenes with the die-hard anti-science crowd where they all join in churches to hold hands, exorcise the demons, and prove there's nothing going on. I like to imagine the ghost of Darwin sighing and rolling up his sleeves for a good old-fashioned culling of simpletons. But of course, they won't remain isolated. They'll come wandering into the streets, open-carrying their AR-15's, coughing on the rest of us and daring the government to stop them. That's when the ugly martial law scenarios are going to start popping up.

Yeah, 6-8 weeks sounds right. "WAAAAH YOU CAN'T CANCEL SUMMER"
  #29  
Old 03-19-2020, 06:43 AM
HMS Irruncible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
Too many people live in urban areas and cannot just go shoot a deer for food.
Have you been to an urban area lately? If I wanted to kill a deer, any given morning at 6AM I could go into my backyard, stand quietly between my hydrangeas, and kill one with a heavy shovel.

That's kind of tongue-in-cheek. I doubt the deer overpopulation problem would last more than a week or two if things really came to that.
  #30  
Old 03-19-2020, 06:53 AM
Edward The Head is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Somewhere in time
Posts: 6,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
From their emergency fund. If they don't have one, they are living beyond their means.
I have an emergency fund. Do you know where it's at? In a bank that I have to go out of my way to get to. It's that way so I have to think about getting to it. I have no bank card, no check book, I have to go to the bank to withdraw money. The banks are now closing, so how am I to get to my emergency fund?
  #31  
Old 03-19-2020, 06:57 AM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is online now
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 37,830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward The Head View Post
I have an emergency fund. Do you know where it's at? In a bank that I have to go out of my way to get to. It's that way so I have to think about getting to it. I have no bank card, no check book, I have to go to the bank to withdraw money. The banks are now closing, so how am I to get to my emergency fund?
You're supposed to have an emergency emergency fund. And five years cash on hand to supplement your emergency emergency fund.
  #32  
Old 03-19-2020, 07:24 AM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 37,153
For the majority of people in the world, when they accused of "living beyond their means," what they are really just doing is "living." Maybe that's exactly what some folks have a problem with.
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.
  #33  
Old 03-19-2020, 07:25 AM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 13,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post
You're supposed to have an emergency emergency fund. And five years cash on hand to supplement your emergency emergency fund.
Also at least 30 pounds of iridium ingots, which everyone will demand instead of paper.

Last edited by Darren Garrison; 03-19-2020 at 07:27 AM.
  #34  
Old 03-19-2020, 07:54 AM
Ike Witt's Avatar
Ike Witt is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Lost in the mists of time
Posts: 15,383
This whole thing almost seems like an early dress rehearsal for the actual apocalypse.
  #35  
Old 03-19-2020, 08:25 AM
snowthx's Avatar
snowthx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacratomato area
Posts: 3,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaper View Post
How much time do you think the “government pays 90% of your lost salary” benefit being initiated by some other countries buys? Note that I’ve only heard about it; I have no idea about practical limits or anything.
If we paused all military and space program spending aside from salaries and rent and the like, and diverted those funds to keeping people afloat and social programs, I wonder how long that would last?
  #36  
Old 03-19-2020, 08:48 AM
RickJay is online now
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 42,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
How screwed do you think the economy would be if we didn't shut down and just went about our lives, leading to a predicted 2 to 4 million deaths and 20% of the population at least catching this?

Social distancing is the ONLY solution.
We all get that. The question posed by the OP is how long people will do it.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #37  
Old 03-19-2020, 09:39 AM
Babale is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
We all get that. The question posed by the OP is how long people will do it.
And the answer is, they better do it as long as it takes -- and the government better do everything it takes to ensure this happens, from paying people's salaries and supplying the quarantined, to arresting those who would break quarantine-- or millions will die and the economy will collapse regardless.
  #38  
Old 03-19-2020, 09:41 AM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 19,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
If you tell people that their own lives must be wrecked so that sick old people might have a bit better chance of surviving this disease and give them maybe a year or two more, well, it doesn't matter what Ultravires personally thinks and you can take shots at me on here all you want. Any planning must take into account what "people" will think.
That's just it though; the severity seems to ramp up VERY quickly once past about 50- below 50 and it doesn't seem to be dramatically bad- something like 5% hospitalized, and 6% of that in critical care (read "ventilator") and an even smaller number dead- like 0.15% of total infected or something like that.


https://imgur.com/j3GNJBQ

is a chart derived from a longer study (link to PDF in this thread).

But go above 50, and it rises dramatically. 10% requiring hospitalization, and 12% of them requiring critical care, with 0.60% of all infected dying. In your sixties, it's more like 16% requiring hospitalization, 27% of those needing critical care, and 2.2% of total infected dying. And it gets worse fast from there. The numbers for people in their 70s are 24% hospitalized, 43% of them requiring critical care, and 5% of all infected dying. Numbers for people in their 80s and older are 27% hospitalized, 80% in critical care, and 9% dying.

So while it's likely to cut a bloody swath through the truly elderly, it's also likely to really impact a lot of people who aren't even retirement aged yet. Most 65 year old retirees have another 10-15 years left, and most people who are 75 have another 5 or more.
  #39  
Old 03-19-2020, 10:07 AM
Edward The Head is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Somewhere in time
Posts: 6,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post
You're supposed to have an emergency emergency fund. And five years cash on hand to supplement your emergency emergency fund.
Well the bank IS closed right now. I suppose if I was quick I might be able to get enough cash to last me five years. If you don't hear from me in a couple of hours come look for me at the local lockup.
  #40  
Old 03-19-2020, 10:24 AM
Babale is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
Yeah, that's great. I know you had to take a shot at me, but if you have read any of my posts that is not what I am saying at all.

What I am addressing is exactly what this thread is addressing. A month's long lockdown is simply unrealistic and any "flattening the curve" plan that requires healthy people to lose their jobs, their savings, and live life where things are shut down for an extended period of time will simply not work without the most draconian military measures and even then things will only be worse when people start shooting back.

Note that I will not be shooting back, but that is the problem with any of these "solutions." They are all "People must do X; People must do Y." Well, if we have learned anything from human history is that "people" will look out for their own selfish interests unless given an overwhelming reason to do otherwise.

Take WWII; that generation made huge sacrifices so that the next generation could live in a world free from tyranny. If you tell people that their own lives must be wrecked so that sick old people might have a bit better chance of surviving this disease and give them maybe a year or two more, well, it doesn't matter what Ultravires personally thinks and you can take shots at me on here all you want. Any planning must take into account what "people" will think.

And any plan that says we have to continue with what we are doing for six months simply will not work. So shake your head and rend your garments about how terribly selfish people are while the world crumbles around you. I'm trying to be realistic in a world where no politician, Dem or Republican, wants to level with people and tell them that barring some miracle breakthrough in treatment, some tough choices will have to be made.
The government will have to help people, obviously. It will cost billions and hurt the economy, theres no question about that. But the damage would be a fraction of what it would be if we try to keep the workforce operating at full capacity. But if we don't do it, millions will die and it will cost billions anyways.

I wonder -- are you willing to tell the posters here who are above 60 (20% chance of death if infected) or immunocompromised or otherwise vulnerable -- "sorry guys, some principals are just too important to break. We cant just give free money to those who need it because they should have been saving up! Wheres your personal responsibility? Tough luck -- we gotta make some tough decisions, and you're just not worth saving".
  #41  
Old 03-19-2020, 10:25 AM
kayaker's Avatar
kayaker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Rural Western PA
Posts: 34,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike Witt View Post
This whole thing almost seems like an early dress rehearsal for the actual apocalypse.
If this follows the three act structure of most movies, understand that we are still in Act One.
  #42  
Old 03-19-2020, 10:27 AM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,397
I think/assume eventually we may move to a situation where people under the age of 55 who do not have serious comorbidities are free to move around assuming they wear respirators, but everyone else (people over age 55 and those with serious health issues) are still under lockdown.

I could see something like that.

I also think we are going to have to start prioritizing not just testing the sick, but testing for antibodies to see who has already had it. That way those people who have already had the disease are given priority to move freely in society to perform necessary functions. People who have had it and survived fine will be prioritized for important jobs.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 03-19-2020 at 10:29 AM.
  #43  
Old 03-19-2020, 10:29 AM
RickJay is online now
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 42,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
And the answer is, they better do it as long as it takes -- and the government better do everything it takes to ensure this happens, from paying people's salaries and supplying the quarantined, to arresting those who would break quarantine-- or millions will die and the economy will collapse regardless.
That's easy to type. It's hard to actually do. The government does not have unlimited amounts of money. Some people have to leave the house to work or everyone else will die of starvation and thirst.

The difficulty of doing this, like the virus, rises exponentially with time. A total lockdown for a couple of weeks isn't really hard at all. Four weeks isn't that bad. "As long as it takes," though, eventually hits the wall of logistical reality.

I'm not sitting here telling you I don't agree with social distancing. I'm at home too and going nowhere, and that's fine. I am happy to do my part; I'm not one of those nitwits who went to spring break anyway because "you know, bro, gotta party, you know? Party on." I'm just telling you the plain truth; there's a limit to what the populace will tolerate, and there is a point at which a total lockdown just cannot be sustained.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #44  
Old 03-19-2020, 10:47 AM
Babale is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
That's easy to type. It's hard to actually do. The government does not have unlimited amounts of money. Some people have to leave the house to work or everyone else will die of starvation and thirst.

The difficulty of doing this, like the virus, rises exponentially with time. A total lockdown for a couple of weeks isn't really hard at all. Four weeks isn't that bad. "As long as it takes," though, eventually hits the wall of logistical reality.

I'm not sitting here telling you I don't agree with social distancing. I'm at home too and going nowhere, and that's fine. I am happy to do my part; I'm not one of those nitwits who went to spring break anyway because "you know, bro, gotta party, you know? Party on." I'm just telling you the plain truth; there's a limit to what the populace will tolerate, and there is a point at which a total lockdown just cannot be sustained.
Nobody is suggesting a "total lockdown". Here is what I proposed:

Quote:
Social distancing is the ONLY solution. We will get as much work done as possible using skeleton crews working far apart, cycled shifts with sanitation in between, and remote work wherever remotely possible. But the economic damage from NOT taking drastic action would be devastating.
We can get a good amount of work done with 1/4 of employees coming in and another 1/4 working overnight. Enough to keep people fed and supplied. Or have different groups of employees work on alternate days. And theres a ton of logistical and administrative work we can do from home now.
  #45  
Old 03-19-2020, 11:43 AM
madsircool is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 8,119
The EU is asking Netflix to slow down its streams making social distancing yet more annoying.

https://ew.com/tv/netflix-coronavirus-speed/

Quote:
In what could be a harbinger of things to come in the United States, the European Union has asked Netflix to tap the breaks on its download speeds in order to reduce network bandwidth now that millions of people have committed to staying home.

European Commissioner Thierry Breton tweeted Wednesday night that he spoke with Netflix CEO Reed Hastings about lowering the service's streaming speeds. It's part of an effort to encourage people and companies to switch back to standard definition, instead of high definition (let alone ultra-crisp 4K), when it's not necessary in order to keep the pipelines flowing to all. The request raises the possibility of streaming content reverting to 20th century-level picture quality during the crisis in some areas.
  #46  
Old 03-19-2020, 11:48 AM
Babale is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,176
"20th century-level picture quality" sounds a little ridiculous to me...
  #47  
Old 03-19-2020, 01:05 PM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,397
Quote:
Originally Posted by madsircool View Post
The EU is asking Netflix to slow down its streams making social distancing yet more annoying.

https://ew.com/tv/netflix-coronavirus-speed/
Thats honestly not a bad idea though.

https://www.howtogeek.com/338983/how...s-netflix-use/


Quote:
Resolution Streaming Bitrate Hourly Conversion
480p (720×480) 1750 kbps ~792 MB per hour
720p (1280×720) 3000 kbps ~1.3 GB per hour
1080p (1920×1080) 4300-5800 kbps ~1.9 GB to ~2.55 GB per hour
1440p (2560×1440) 6350 kbps ~2.8 GB per hour
4K (3840×2160) 8000-16000 kbps ~3.5 GB to ~7 GB per hour
Better to have everyone watching in 480 or 720p, than to have a minority of people watching in 4k while lots of other people are seeing buffering on 480.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #48  
Old 03-19-2020, 02:51 PM
RivkahChaya's Avatar
RivkahChaya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike Witt View Post
This whole thing almost seems like an early dress rehearsal for the actual apocalypse.
My utilities have announced that they will not cut off people while this crisis is going on. But eventually, back bills must be paid. After people are back at work they will "work with customers" on schedules to pay arrears while keeping current on fees, so they don't get cut off.

I'm waiting for an order from either the mayor or the governor that there can be no evictions until the crisis has passed. I'm a lot less worries about paying utilities than I am about paying rent. My rent alone is more than all my utilities put together, and those include my cell (my only phone) and my cable/internet.
__________________
"There's always a non-Voodoo explanation for everything." ~Adrian Monk
  #49  
Old 03-19-2020, 03:02 PM
Mr Quatro is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babale View Post
If people simply go back to work society will fall apart anyways, AND millions will die.
Very true, plus if it is something like an amusement park for example and by chance someone gets the covid-19 and dies and the lawyers can prove it is because the amusement park opened too early the claim could be in the millions.

Misewell be safe than sorry and wait till the virus peaks like China says that it has in Wuhan, not that I would believe China about anything.
  #50  
Old 03-19-2020, 05:26 PM
Leaper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In my own little world...
Posts: 12,764
Well, then you get into questions like if there’s enough money to keep all the small businesses and landlords afloat, and for how long, and how to make sure you could enforce strict quarantine without your troops and police getting sick too. Not to mention the fact that we’re not a week into national efforts and already there’s a thread in this very forum wondering if any of it is doing any good.

I’ll need more convincing before I accept a lockdown, even partial, for several months or more is something anybody anywhere in the world will countenance, no matter how good an idea it is medically.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:05 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017