# Are you willing to go broke to maintain the present lockdown? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 23, 2020, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471 "2020-04-23T22:27:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2020, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/101 "2020-04-24T23:09:50Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > And, furthermore, you know exactly what I meant. I know what you wrote. And I knew that while it came across as incredibly racist, it was written poorly enough that it could have been an honest mistake. So instead of just directly calling you out on it, I gave you multiple opportunities to correct the record. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2020, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/102 "2020-04-24T23:18:37Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > I know what you wrote. And I knew that while it came across as incredibly racist, it was written poorly enough that it could have been an honest mistake. So instead of just directly calling you out on it, I gave you multiple opportunities to correct the record. **Moderator Note** Let’s not make accusations of racism in this forum. If you want to do so, take it to the Pit. Colibri Quarantine Zone Moderator ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2020, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/103 "2020-04-24T23:23:03Z")
Moving to Great Debates. ---
**Author:** ![Aspidistra](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspidistra/32/3894_2.png) [@Aspidistra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspidistra)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2020, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/104 "2020-04-24T23:33:34Z")
> [@cmosdes](#): > > [Here](https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america). > > If you have other data or sources that predicts the death toll, please share! I would be great to other viewpoints on this. I notice that the model on that page gives ‘predictions’ for all days from April 21, whereas it’s now actually the 24th (25th for me :)) so we can see how well they’re holding up: 21st - predicted 2465, actual 2683 22nd - predicted 2020, actual 2358 23rd - predicted 1924, actual 2340 24th - predicted 1818, currently 1858 (day not over yet, usually adds a few hundred before the switch over, very likely to be over 2200 by that point) Data from the Worldometers page. Also, their predictions for dropoffs in daily deaths is unbelievably steep compared to all the countries who reached their peaks earlier (have a look at the 91-divoc site and look at daily deaths for basically anywhere - Italy, Spain, SK, China). No other country has yet experienced daily deaths going down as quickly as they came up. So yes, for both those reasons, that model is not a reliable one ---
**Author:** ![Rushgeekgirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rushgeekgirl/32/3715_2.png) [@Rushgeekgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rushgeekgirl)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/105 "2020-04-25T02:00:31Z")
I’m not reading three pages here so I don’t know how the conversation is going but to the OP I’ve been broke all my life. But I don’t need to be willing to lose my job because I work online and my boss is making bank on this virus what with the online shoppers and the various institutions switching to online classes. I’ll be fine for another few months like this. There are jobs like mine out there. It’s not a huge amount of money but I have been averaging between 10 and 16 dollars an hour for the past few weeks. . .but I never got myself in to debt so I’ll be fine. My daughter was working in a grocery store doing merchandising. She quit because she didn’t feel safe before they started laying people off so she got no unemployment. She found some online work to tide her over too. There’s stuff out there. They may not pay that great but it will keep our rent and internet paid for at least six months and we’ve only left the house a couple of times to do grocery pick-ups. This is the beauty of never living beyond our means I guess. And no I don’t think the restrictions should be lifted AT ALL until we stop having an uptick in cases. Sadly my state governor doesn’t feel the same way. I hate to see him gambling with people’s health and lives like this but luckily my county isn’t so quick to “fix the economy”. ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/106 "2020-04-25T03:43:20Z")
> [@cmosdes](#): > > [Here](https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america). The primary issue with that model is the below assumption that they have, admittedly, built into it. > [@IHME](#): > > Current social distancing assumed until infections minimized and containment implemented. The intent of their model is to help healthcare administrators and government officials make plans. Unfortunately, if those officials don’t follow the recommendations, the model falls completely apart. As a prime example, this is what their model says about the state of Georgia: > [@IHME](#): > > After June 22, 2020, relaxing social distancing may be possible with containment strategies that include testing, contact tracing, isolation, and limiting gathering size. In case you missed the news where even Trump says that Kemp might be jumping the gun, the state isn’t planning on staying the course until June 22nd (they were already using fewer social distancing measures than recommended by the IHME, and they just loosened them even more today). Oops. ---
**Author:** ![cmosdes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cmosdes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmosdes)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/107 "2020-04-25T04:31:41Z")
> [@DMC](#): > > The primary issue with that model is the below assumption that they have, admittedly, built into it. Those assumptions haven’t changed since they started publishing the predictions, as far as I can tell. I’ve been following their predictions for a little over a month and I recall that always being there. Their predictions are somewhat optimistic in that sense, so you make a good point. On the other hand, their own predictions have been shifting greatly over time. Same assumptions, different outcomes. That points to a lessened impact as more has been learned. A lessened impact leads to the conclusion we can start opening up. The states that opened today will be very interesting experiments, to be sure. On the news they portrayed salons as rather busy, which argues against the point that people will stay away. Of course, if there is a spike, that is going to change. I feel a very, very great deal will be known by the end of May. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/108 "2020-04-25T05:26:06Z")
> [@cmosdes](#): > > I don’t know why your numbers are so off. > > [US has a 15% unemployment rate with over 26 million having filed since this began in mid-March](https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/business-52398837) > > And again, the St. Louis Fed chair predicts 30%, albeit he thinks just briefly. The early estimate is probably low because it was made on March 30, before the majority of the lockdowns. Using your number of 15%, that’s slightly higher than Sweden’s predicted rate. You have not cited the St. Louis Fed chair prediction that I saw. When was it made? > [@cmosdes](#): > > I haven’t checked the GDP numbers, but I’ve seen reports of a 30% or 40% contraction of the US GDP. That could just be for the quarter, but even so that is a 10% annualized contraction? I think? 3x what you said Sweden is facing. The source you linked for the unemployment rate says that the contraction is forecast to be 5.9%, according to the IMF. > [@](#): > > In the US, the economy is expected to contract 5.9% this year, according to the International Monetary Fund. > [@cmosdes](#): > > I don’t have any studies that I can point to that says allowing consumers more freedom to go buy more stuff is better for the economy. Do you have an evidence that the economy is better with a lockdown? There’s this article based on a study of the lockdowns during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic where the article says that the study concludes that places that were shut down more fully and longer had the fastest economic recovery times. Places that were locked down 8 days earlier and 48 days longer recovered faster. [Pandemic Shutdowns Work for the Economy, Too Cities that clamped down early and longer in the Spanish flu outbreak had faster growth once the danger passed.](https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-27/tough-pandemic-shutdowns-work-for-the-economy-too) > [@](#): > > The study, by economists Sergio Correia, Stephan Luck and Emil Verner looks at the economic impact of the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic in the U.S. The authors combined data on mortality and economic variables from the period with evidence on local implementation of so-called non-pharmaceutical interventions like social distancing. 1 They conclude that the earlier, more forcefully and longer cities responded, the better their economic recovery. > . . . > That said, the cities that implemented aggressive social distancing and shutdowns to contain the virus came out looking better. Implementing these policies eight days earlier, or maintaining them for 46 days longer were associated with 4% and 6% higher post-pandemic manufacturing employment, respectively. The gains for output were similar. Likewise, faster and longer-lasting distancing measures were associated with higher post-pandemic banking activity. [Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: Evidence from the 1918 Flu](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3561560) [study] There’s also evidence that during recessions, the death rate falls. [Study: Great Recession Led To Fewer Deaths](https://www.npr.org/2018/01/09/576669311/hidden-brain-great-recession-deaths) > [@](#): > > Recessions are painful for a variety of reasons. A new study shows that during the Great Recession, mortality rates declined faster in areas where the unemployment grew. You can see this happening in New York where non-Covid hospital admissions are down from a decrease in traffic accidents, stress-induced heart attacks, decreased trauma (possibly from work related injuries), decrease in crime, etc. Recessions also don’t have that much of an effect on the suicide rate. The US has the highest suicide rate it has had in decades. A study on the last recession was inconclusive on whether suicide rates rose because of it. [Did the Great Recession increase suicides in the USA? Evidence from an interrupted time-series analysis.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28625812) > [@](#): > > CONCLUSIONS:We found little evidence to suggest that the Great Recession interrupted existing trajectories of suicide rates. None of that is to suggest that recessions are good. It’s to say that the solutions about the lockdowns should be based on scientific evidence both about the coronavirus itself and studies about the economy as well. If your intention is to help the people who don’t have jobs by giving them money, I share that intention. But taking salaries from working people to give to non-working people is only spreading the pain around. [78% of the country live paycheck to paycheck](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/09/shutdown-highlights-that-4-in-5-us-workers-live-paycheck-to-paycheck.html). Taking the paycheck of the working people to give to the non-working people just flips who now doesn’t have any money to live. IMO, the solution needs to move money from people who are rich enough not to work because the wealth is concentrated in that segment of the population. [[Richest 1% of Americans Close to Surpassing Wealth of Middle Class](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-09/one-percenters-close-to-surpassing-wealth-of-u-s-middle-class)] But that wouldn’t be enough, so there needs to also be a more broad based system to get money from everyone in a graduated way. > [@cmosdes](#): > > Sweden is a case we can only judge in time, not immediately. Sometimes the short term gains, or losses, are most decidedly different than the final outcome. Looks like Sweden is increasing their lockdown policies. If they’re leading the way, they’re going in the opposite direction of relaxing their lockdown. [Sweden Steps Up Coronavirus Controls as Warm Weather Adds to Risks](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-24/sweden-steps-up-covid-19-controls-as-warm-weather-adds-to-risks) ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/109 "2020-04-25T05:45:22Z")
> [@cmosdes](#): > > The states that opened today will be very interesting experiments, to be sure. On the news they portrayed salons as rather busy, which argues against the point that people will stay away. Of course, if there is a spike, that is going to change. I feel a very, very great deal will be known by the end of May. I’m not sure “interesting” is the correct word to use. Deadly might be more apt. The models you referred to show zero deaths by July, but again, that is based on officials delaying these changes to the current policies to the recommended dates from the IHME. I would, sadly, take a rather large bet that at least 1 person in the US will die due to this virus after the middle of July. ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/110 "2020-04-25T06:25:05Z")
> [@HoneyBadgerDC](#): > > I mentioned this in another thread that I believe in countries like Sweden they tend to allow people to live out their natural lives and at the end of their lives they take into consideration quality of life. In the U.S. the final years of our lives turns us into ATM machines so they want to keep us alive as long as possible. We may have an excessively high population of people here that would likely not be alive in many other countries. This could greatly change the death per million numbers. Numbers are so wildly variable across the map that it’s a fools errand to try to declare a specific action as THE solution to the problem. Taiwan didn’t go into lockdown and they’ve fared very well, much better than Sweden I think. The notion that Place X went into hard lockdowns therefore that is the reason cases are low there is a fallacy, correlation does not equal causation, as everyone here should know. Personally my belief is that the virus is much, much more widespread than what confirmed cases show and that it’s possible there are different mutations going around with very different effects on people and locales. I don’t know if there has been any study done comparing possible virus strains between places with low impacts and places with high impacts. For example, I live in Thailand and so far the number of confirmed deaths is around 50 since the virus was first detected in middle January (to put things into perspective is the daily number of traffic deaths), there are some lockdown measures but only for the last 3 or 4 weeks. Not hard lockdowns though, I was at the supermarket yesterday with plenty of people milling around, hardly different than during normal times. Then there is Italy, hit brutally; what is the difference? People here were living pretty much as normal when that unfolded and the virus had been introduced weeks earlier. I don’t know what the variables are that cause such difference, but clearly this illustrates that one can’t draw definitive conclusions on what works or doesn’t by pointing at specific strategies. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/111 "2020-04-25T07:13:13Z")
> [@Ale](#): > > Numbers are so wildly variable across the map that it’s a fools errand to try to declare a specific action as THE solution to the problem. Taiwan didn’t go into lockdown and they’ve fared very well, much better than Sweden I think. That is because besides doing social distancing, Taiwan tested a lot (really a lot) and quarantined the ones identified as carriers. They also did what has been a bit of a no-go in the USA, hard tracking of any suspected carriers (like the ones coming from abroad) by commanding their cell phones to get their details so then the authorities can confirm that they are complying with their quarantines. > **[In Taiwan, the pandemic is playing out very differently. What does life look...](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/taiwanese-authorities-stay-vigilant-virus-crisis-eases-n1188781)** > > Cellphones tracked, restaurants with X's taped on every other chair, thermometers to enter a building. Taiwan shows that the post-virus normal is different. > [@Ale](#): > > The notion that Place X went into hard lockdowns therefore that is the reason cases are low there is a fallacy, correlation does not equal causation, as everyone here should know. > > Personally my belief is that the virus is much, much more widespread than what confirmed cases show and that it’s possible there are different mutations going around with very different effects on people and locales. I don’t know if there has been any study done comparing possible virus strains between places with low impacts and places with high impacts. > > For example, I live in Thailand and so far the number of confirmed deaths is around 50 since the virus was first detected in middle January (to put things into perspective is the daily number of traffic deaths), there are some lockdown measures but only for the last 3 or 4 weeks. > Not hard lockdowns though, I was at the supermarket yesterday with plenty of people milling around, hardly different than during normal times. > Then there is Italy, hit brutally; what is the difference? People here were living pretty much as normal when that unfolded and the virus had been introduced weeks earlier. > I don’t know what the variables are that cause such difference, but clearly this illustrates that one can’t draw definitive conclusions on what works or doesn’t by pointing at specific strategies. :dubious: Because the authorities in Thailand said that the lockdown helped. [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-07/thailand-says-lockdown-is-slowing-spread-of-novel-coronavirus](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-07/thailand-says-lockdown-is-slowing-spread-of-novel-coronavirus) > [@](#): > > “It’s clear that government measures have slowed down the spread,” Taweesilp Witsanuyotin, a spokesman for the Covid-19 center, said in a briefing. People are cooperating with state-of-emergency curbs and there’s less need for more stringent steps, he added. > > Thailand began shutting down schools, universities, bars and recreational venues last month to implement social distancing after infections surged. And besides social distancing, seems that masks and face shields helped, one item that the USA got it wrong early on IMHO. [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-thailand-monks/monks-in-masks-thai-buddhist-novices-study-with-social-distancing-idUSKCN2241QP](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-thailand-monks/monks-in-masks-thai-buddhist-novices-study-with-social-distancing-idUSKCN2241QP) ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/112 "2020-04-25T16:45:12Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > And besides social distancing, seems that masks and face shields helped, one item that the USA got it wrong early on IMHO social distancing costs a lot of money when it involves shutting down businesses. And considering the virus spreads before symptoms manifest themselves it’s always going to be a function of transportation, public interaction, and social customs. The horse is always going to be outside the barn when the door is shut. I agree about masks. From a cost/benefit perspective it would be easier to make 400 million masks that reduce the zone of infection. They don’t have to filter the virus in order to stop the spread, they just need to reduce the infection zone. A simple mask that can be washed daily or multiple times a day. Doing this allows us to concentrate on the people most susceptible since the vast majority of people can get this virus without severe consequences. Those are the people who get n-95 masks and isolation. But all this is based on knowing what we’re dealing with ahead of time. Now we know. Now we can focus on restoring the financial devastation it has caused and create a medical treatment that works. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/113 "2020-04-25T16:57:33Z")
I left out a sentence. It’s the vulnerable who get the N-95 masks first. The rest can start using generic masks early-on to reduce the spread and free-up N-95 masks until production can catch up. ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/114 "2020-04-25T17:40:38Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > That is because besides doing social distancing, Taiwan tested a lot (really a lot) and quarantined the ones identified as carriers. They also did what has been a bit of a no-go in the USA, hard tracking of any suspected carriers (like the ones coming from abroad) by commanding their cell phones to get their details so then the authorities can confirm that they are complying with their quarantines. > > [In Taiwan, the coronavirus pandemic is playing out very differently. What does life without a lockdown look like?](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/taiwanese-authorities-stay-vigilant-virus-crisis-eases-n1188781) > > :dubious: > > Because the authorities in Thailand said that the lockdown helped. > > [Bloomberg - Are you a robot?](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-07/thailand-says-lockdown-is-slowing-spread-of-novel-coronavirus) > And besides social distancing, seems that masks and face shields helped, one item that the USA got it wrong early on IMHO. > > [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-thailand-monks/monks-in-masks-thai-buddhist-novices-study-with-social-distancing-idUSKCN2241QP](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-thailand-monks/monks-in-masks-thai-buddhist-novices-study-with-social-distancing-idUSKCN2241QP) What would _I_ know about how the situation is and has evolved in the place I live? :dubious: Can you Google how the lockdown looks when I went out this morning to do groceries? Or when I met with a friend in the afternoon while half the kids in the condo were playing together? Hardly anyone keeps distance, almost everyone uses masks… incorrectly; except the kids, none had one on. From what I have observed of people living their everyday lives here I should be seeing people keeling over in droves for months already, according to the expectations of some here. And yet case numbers are negligible, less than 3000 thousand out of a population of over 70 million (that’s 0.000041% of the population, deaths are 0.0000007%) Actual evidence that restrictions on work are what has kept cases low: pretty thin on the ground. When restrictions were implemented it was two months after the first cases were detected and reported cases stood at around 100; two months with no lockdowns of businesses, 100 cases. As a matter of fact, restrictions here were imposed and reported cases rose _afterwards_. I’ve seen zero evidence that keeping people out of work with lockdowns has had any significant impact, other than something that reminds me of the joke about a rock and tigers. Sure, anything can be said to help, and as long as it’s not qualified in any way it’s next to useless to asses how effective that is in the overall scheme of things. Meanwhile, [hungry people out of a job have to line up for hours on the street to get food donations](https://www.thailand-business-news.com/economics/78820-jobless-thais-queue-for-food-as-pandemic-hits-economy.html), so they get none of the supposed benefits of the lockdown theory, having to bunch up to get food to survive, and all of the downsides of having no income; but that’s OK because there is the _assumption_ that it is the right thing to do. And of course the assumption _has_ to be correct, otherwise tanking the economy over a bad idea is too much to contemplate. The problem is that the assumptions are built on insufficient data, for instance nobody seems to have a good idea of what percentage of the population is or has been infected, which is pretty basic and necessary information to have for taking decisions, specially decisions with very harmful, long lasting consequences. Choosing to go by as **GIGObuster** you should know that using incomplete or unreliable data to effect outcomes is bad practice. ---
**Author:** ![Monocracy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monocracy/32/4493_2.png) [@Monocracy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monocracy)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/115 "2020-04-25T18:45:24Z")
> [@cmosdes](#): > > [Here](https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america). > > If you have other data or sources that predicts the death toll, please share! I would be great to other viewpoints on this. **Aspidistra** ’s reply in post [104](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22269271&postcount=104) said a lot of what I was going to say. I’d just add that they have the death toll dropping over 100 per day so that by May 1st, it projects just 1,000 deaths. This seems insanely optimistic. I don’t know what type of model they’re using, but it is clearly wrong. As for the data and sources I use, I’ve just been looking at the numbers every day for the U.S., individual states, and other countries. I can’t predict what the actual number of deaths will be, but it will clearly exceed 70k. So, who is the IHME? With a quick Google search, I found this article from April 14: [US COVID-19 deaths “poorly predicted” by IHME model](https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2020/04/14/us-covid-19-deaths-poorly-predicted-by-ihme-model.html) > [@](#): > > Seventy percent of US states had an actual death rate outside the 95 percent prediction interval for that state, casting doubt on whether the model is suitable to inform COVID-19 resource allocation. > [@](#): > > The model, which provides forecasts on a state-by-state basis across the United States, has been circulated widely by the media and on social media, and has informed policy decisions at the highest levels, having been cited at a White House press conference on 31 March 2020. :eek: This is bad. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/116 "2020-04-25T22:29:43Z")
> [@Ale](#): > > From what I have observed of people living their everyday lives here I should be seeing people keeling over in droves for months already, according to the expectations of some here. I get your perspective except I think it’s missing some detail. When this started we didn’t know what to expect. Based on different versions of the virus it was thought that it would double every 6 days. However, when you look at the death rate it was doubling at less then 3 days. Starting with 115 actual deaths on March 17 and doubling it every 6 days we would be at 15,000 by the end of April. But doubling every 3 days puts the number at 1.8 million. If we knew that young healthy people tended to survive the disease we might have chosen a different path and diverted funds to the elderly and those with per-existing conditions. But we didn’t. All we knew is New York city spun out of control in a matter of weeks and we would be overwhelmed if that continued to other cities. We would have run out of medical personnel and that would have been it. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/117 "2020-04-26T00:23:17Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > NYC has a death rate of 786 per million and Sweden has a rate of 192 per million. > > As of this day in the US there are about 50,000 casualties of which 14,000 are from nursing homes. that’s about a third and that doesn’t count all the elderly and medically challenged who are not in nursing homes. > > Had we focused on the people most effected we could have kept the country running and focused resources on protecting the people who need it. This is staggeringly illogical. We’re talking about a virus that spreads primarily among closely-packed population groups and is extra-deadly to old folks. In your first paragraph, you compare the death rates for some of the most closely-packed Americans to the death rates for an entire country. Sweden has a population density of 26 people per square mile. NYC, by contrast, has a population density a little above 26 THOUSAND people per square mile. And you’re gonna try to compare the death rates in these two geographic areas? In your second paragraph, you point out that deaths are happening disproportionately in nursing homes. Uh, **yeah**. That’s where you have high population densities of elderly people, and where it’s really hard to engage in appropriate social distancing, since often people don’t have kitchens and meals are often served in cafeterias. The social distancing measures we’ve engaged in so dramatically have brought death rates down dramatically. Your argument is akin to saying, “Look at those vast areas of land along the coast where there are life guards, the numbers of drowning victims are way higher there than anywhere inland, these life guards are useless.” ---
**Author:** ![cmosdes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cmosdes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmosdes)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/118 "2020-04-26T01:01:58Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > The early estimate is probably low because it was made on March 30, before the majority of the lockdowns. Using your number of 15%, that’s slightly higher than Sweden’s predicted rate. You have not cited the St. Louis Fed chair prediction that I saw. When was it made? Not sure of the exact date. Not long ago. A quick google search should turn it up for you. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > The source you linked for the unemployment rate says that the contraction is forecast to be 5.9%, according to the IMF. Fair enough. I’ve seen other places that said it would be much higher. It is pure speculation, so pick a number you like and find a cite for it. This could go back and forth a lot because no one really knows. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > There’s this article based on a study of the lockdowns during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic where the article says that the study concludes that places that were shut down more fully and longer had the fastest economic recovery times. Places that were locked down 8 days earlier and 48 days longer recovered faster. Yep, I’ve read that many times. St. Louis vs. Philadelphia, I think. I’m just not going to put a lot of trust in a study that is looking at events over 100 years old dealing with economies that were VASTLY different. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > There’s also evidence that during recessions, the death rate falls. > [Study: Great Recession Led To Fewer Deaths](https://www.npr.org/2018/01/09/576669311/hidden-brain-great-recession-deaths) I’ll have to read this later. I read part of it. It says the death rate was among the general population, not just the unemployed. It is possible gains in one area offset losses in another, but that is a stretch. I can equally point to studies that link deaths to unemployment. Again, we can play the game of finding cites as much as you’d like. Well, no, we can’t, because while I truly do appreciate your considered and measured responses, what is clear to me is that no matter what position one takes there studies to back it up. We’ve kind of shown that each, no? We are in uncharted waters. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > You can see this happening in New York where non-Covid hospital admissions are down from a decrease in traffic accidents, stress-induced heart attacks, decreased trauma (possibly from work related injuries), decrease in crime, etc. > > Recessions also don’t have that much of an effect on the suicide rate. The US has the highest suicide rate it has had in decades. A study on the last recession was inconclusive on whether suicide rates rose because of it. I never claimed higher deaths were due to suicide rates. I suspect they are due to uninsured, which is what my original claim was about, not directly because of a recession. So there is a huge difference in what you are citing vs. what I’m claiming. Additionally, I don’t have a study to show that people are more likely to suffer stress, anxiety and fear when they are laid off. Is that not self-evident? > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > If your intention is to help the people who don’t have jobs by giving them money, I share that intention. But taking salaries from working people to give to non-working people is only spreading the pain around. [78% of the country live paycheck to paycheck](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/09/shutdown-highlights-that-4-in-5-us-workers-live-paycheck-to-paycheck.html). Taking the paycheck of the working people to give to the non-working people just flips who now doesn’t have any money to live. IMO, the solution needs to move money from people who are rich enough not to work because the wealth is concentrated in that segment of the population. [[Richest 1% of Americans Close to Surpassing Wealth of Middle Class](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-09/one-percenters-close-to-surpassing-wealth-of-u-s-middle-class)] But that wouldn’t be enough, so there needs to also be a more broad based system to get money from everyone in a graduated way. You are saying we can’t take the money from those that are working and there isn’t enough money from those that are rich enough to not have to work. Where is the money going to come from? MANY of the people who have been laid off were living paycheck to paycheck and now THEY have no paycheck at all. Again, my stance is that if you went to many of those people and asked if they were willing to work for benefits only for the next several months, they’d take it in a heartbeat. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > Looks like Sweden is increasing their lockdown policies. If they’re leading the way, they’re going in the opposite direction of relaxing their lockdown. > > [Sweden Steps Up Coronavirus Controls as Warm Weather Adds to Risks](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-24/sweden-steps-up-covid-19-controls-as-warm-weather-adds-to-risks) Did you read that cite? It says no such thing. It says they are considering it and may adopt a stricter enforcement. It doesn’t come close to saying they are actively going into lockdown. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/119 "2020-04-26T01:33:04Z")
To address the op: > [@cmosdes](#): > > Are you willing to give up your paycheck until the lockdowns are lifted? Hell no. To forestall similar questions: > [@similar questions](#): > > Are you willing to get punched in the nose every morning until the lockdowns are lifted? Shit no. > [@similar questions](#): > > Are you willing to eat nothing but raw spaghetti noodles until the lockdowns are lifted? For the love of god, no way. > [@similar questions](#): > > Are you willing to live under a bridge with a bunch of meth addicts until the lockdowns are lifted? What the fuck? Of course not. > [@similar questions](#): > > Are you willing to wear a shirt made of poison ivy until the lockdowns are lifted? Let me think about it for a minute nope. > [@similar questions](#): > > Are you willing to get answer ridiculous non sequitur questions constantly until the lockdowns are lifted? Possibly. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471/120 "2020-04-26T02:18:24Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > The social distancing measures we’ve engaged in so dramatically have brought death rates down dramatically. Your argument is akin to saying, “Look at those vast areas of land along the coast where there are life guards, the numbers of drowning victims are way higher there than anywhere inland, these life guards are useless.” yes the social distancing brought the rates down. That’s not the argument. The argument is whether it was the most cost effective method. If we focused on nursing homes early on we may have cut the death rate in half and at a much smaller cost. You can smother a fire with bundles of $100 bills or you can throw .25 cents worth of water on it. The results are the same. It’s important to get the best results for the least amount of money because those efficiencies mean lives. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-willing-to-go-broke-to-maintain-the-present-lockdown/852471.md?page=7)