Are you willing to go broke to maintain the present lockdown?

Great Debates
81

I fully acknowledge the lockdowns we did prevented a huge mess in the short term. We kept our medical systems from being overrun. I get it. It worked. It needed to be done.

A vaccine is questionable. There are both good and bad indicators about getting one. Even if we get one, it is at least 12 months away, and 18 seems more reasonable.

That means the virus is going to move around, from person to person, with nothing we can really do to stop it. We can slow it, which we have, but we can’t stop it. Ever. Not without a vaccine.

Flattening the curve is not about reducing the infection rate. It is about spreading the infection rate out so medical systems would not be overrun. That means that whatever percentage of the population that is going to get this is still going to get this, isolation or no.

82

You seem to be operating under the assumption that “reopening the economy” will fix everything, but I disagree. It’s probably more expensive for a business to open up with no customers than it us to stay closed. And, for the most part, people aren’t staying home because they’re being forced. They’re staying home because they’re scared of getting sick or spreading the disease.

Fear is a powerful motivator. Remember the Beltway Sniper, when some guy ( two guys, as it turned out), was gunning down random people in DC? Even though they ultimately killed less than a dozen people, they took an incredible economic toll on that city. People stopped going out, even though they knew how incredibly slim the chances that they would be a victim. People react strongly to specific threats even if it may be mathematically irrational.

I don’t know of any businesses that closed because of a government mandate. I know of several that made valiant efforts to remain open, but couldn’t do so because their customers stayed home and their employees stopped showing up.

I think there’s a legitimate argument that some states are being overly restrictive, especially with regards to certain outdoor activities. But I disagree that this narrow swath has any economic significance in big picture terms. The economy didn’t crash because some states closed golf courses and skate parks, and reopening golf courses and skate parks isn’t going to fix anything economically. Everyone seems to be in broad agreement as to the general outlines of our Coronavirus mitigation efforts. The controversies are at the edges and largely involve activities that don’t have economic impact, like going to parks and visiting family. Even opening hair salons and massage parlors will have minimal economic impact.

(As an aside, I’m not sure how social distancing would work in a massage parlor. I’m imagining a sign that says “We WILL fuck you with a ten foot pole!”)

This is a politically motivated false dilemma. This is an epic disaster that happened during a Republican administration under mostly Republican leadership. It took them 6 weeks to even figure out how to spin this in order to dodge the blame. I don’t think anyone LIKES what’s happening now. We all, Democrat and Republican alike, want to get back to work. The idea that we are still doing this because Democrats are a lazy shirkers looking for an excuse not to work is pure propaganda.

We all wish the plane hadn’t crashed. But the idea that we can fly away the crash site and keep on going like nothing ever happened is magical thinking.

83

Where are you getting your numbers? Why are the anti-lockdown people always underestimating the deaths from this virus? A few days ago, one of them posted on this board (and is since banned) that the estimate was 60k deaths. How can we trust your analysis if you can’t even be realistic about the mounting death toll?

For the past couple weeks, over 2000 Americans per day on average have been dying from COVID-19. Even if there were only 1500 deaths per day for the next week, then 1000 for the week after, that would be 70k total deaths right there.

And it’s unlikely the numbers will go down that quickly. The numbers in New York state are dropping, but they are still rising in other states. I don’t know how many people will die because of this disease, but the numbers will easily pass 70k.

84

Here.

If you have other data or sources that predicts the death toll, please share! I would be great to other viewpoints on this.

My point about the death toll numbers is that the outcomes as predicted by the models are questionable. Not because the models are wildly wrong or the people don’t know what they are doing, but because the inputs and information that feed the models are not well understood yet.

My contention is that the numbers that will die from this is a constant, absent a vaccine and possibly even with one. The variable is how quickly that happens and what collateral issues we deal with as a result of any choices we make.

85

Businesses that feel they are better of staying closed even if they are allowed to open are, of course, free to stay closed.

The part about “even if we lift lockdowns people will still stay away” seems like a contradiction. If people are going to naturally stay away anyway, why do we need the lockdowns? If people aren’t going to stay away, then you can’t argue that lifting the lockdowns will do no good. Which is it?

Sweden is a test case for which we will not know the results for another 18 months, maybe a year. They are hurting, both in death toll and economy, but when the second wave comes through it is entirely possible they have a greatly reduced impact from it. Or they are crushed by this. We don’t know. We can only wait to see what happens.

86

I think if the Trump administration had a solid plan for protecting people (both workers and consumers), then people wouldn’t cling so heavily to the lockdown option.

Like, instead of throwing $1200 checks at everyone regardless of need, the feds could have used that money to manufacture multiple-use N95s for every person and flooded the airwaves with ads that provide instructions on how to handle and wear the masks. I know I wouldn’t have a whole lot of fear about going shopping if I had on such a mask and everyone else in the store had on one too.

Or imagine if there were enough test kits for local health departments to conduct probabilistic monitoring in their jurisdictions. And every day they would update the results. Maybe a “safe” day would be one with fewer than 5 cases per 1000. A “avoid large gatherings and wear a mask out in public” day would be one with between 5 and 20 cases. And a “stay the fuck home” day would be one with more than 20 cases per 1000. Without this kind of testing, it makes sense to assume the worst and just “stay the fuck home”. People are flying blind. But it doesn’t have to be like this.

87

I completely agree. What a clusterfuck this turned into because an utter lack of leadership at the highest level.

We did what America always does. Respond in the most inefficient way possible and throw a ton of money at it, eventually making the lowest earners in our society pay the most.

88

De Blasio video

89

Showing support for Aisian-Americans and their businesses is the same as showing support for China?

90

Help me out with the timestamp that covers “show[ing] support of a country”? Oh wait, you can’t, because it’s not in there.

If you’re equating supporting non-white Americans with supporting the country their ancestors lived in, by all means please put that out in the open.

91

Certain expenses are fixed and don’t vary whether your business is open or closed; rent is usually a good example. Certain expenses are highly dependent on the number of customers: if you have only a few, e.g., then you will be going through a lot fewer supplies in the restroom. A large percentage of a business’s expenses, however, represent a cliff: your expenses rise steeply when you first open, and then only gradually increase with further customers. The specific mix of expenses will vary based on your type of business, but consider for example a restaurant.

If it’s open for business, then the lights are on, the climate control is set to comfortable temperatures, and the coolers are running, and the amount of electricity these use will increase only slightly as the numbers of customers increase. If they are closed, however, the lights are probably off, the freezers may be emptied and unplugged, and the climate control is set to the minimal level needed in their locale (e.g., to keep the pipes from freezing). Opening to serve even a few customers causes the electric bill to shoot up, then level out.

Similarly, you’ll need more staff as you have more customers, but there will be a minimum staffing level you need to be open at all. Your food suppliers usually have minimum order quantities: if with a full house you use two boxes of spinach a week, with 25% of your customers you can cut back to one box, but you probably can’t cut back to half boxes or every-other-week delivery so you end up throwing away the excess. Serving just a few people makes your variable expenses per customer a lot higher; will the increased revenue from those few customers be enough to offset the increased costs of being open?

Maybe, but maybe not. It quite literally may not be worth it to be open for just a few customers. This is the same logic that leads some restaurants and bars to close early on really slow nights.

[quote=“Heffalump_and_Roo, post:48, topic:852471”]

For every one of you, SayTwo, how many are going to be like slash2k?

Why?

I’m not elderly quite yet, but I’m old enough to be at increased risk if I came down with covid, and I am around a lot of people who are older or in worse health than I am, so I have be cautious for their sakes as well as my own. Do you think there are so few of us in that situation?

92

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

And again, the St. Louis Fed chair predicts 30%, albeit he thinks just briefly.

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.

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?

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.

93

Again, overhead is not a concept most people are unfamiliar with. I’m certainly not. There is a cost to doing business and a margin to be gained from volume production. The higher the volume, the less the cost of overhead/customer and the more you can make. I understand business 101.

Some, but not all, restaurants around here have gone to curbside pickup. Clearly they are seeing a business benefit to having greatly reduced patronage. Some businesses have done similar things. You order online, drive to the store, call, and they bring it to your car. They clearly don’t have the same revenue they had before th e lockdown. Bowling alleys are completely closed. As are gyms. No way to do curbside with them. The local clinic is threatening to close because nothing but emergencies can be seen right now.

In short, some businesses are open and absorbing all that overhead you talked about even with a reduced clientele. If other businesses don’t see the benefit, they can stay closed.

94

He was showing support for Chinese Americans (look at the sign in the video) during a pandemic that started in China. big surprise NYC is the worst hit city and represents a third of all US deaths. Who could possibly have foreseen the danger in advising people to join a Chinese celebration parade and partake of their cuisine in small restaurants.

95

That’s is precisely what I thought you were saying-Thank you for the confirmation. :rolleyes:

96

If you feel that there was more danger to this event over others, or these small restaurants over other small restaurants, please, by all means, state so clearly.

97

Which isn’t what you wrote. You wrote:

which didn’t happen.

So again, please clarify if you are equating support of Americans in Chinatown with support of the country, China.

98

False narrative. I’m equating the deliberate encouragement of New Yorkers to physically partake of events and places directly associated with Chinese people. An action likely to bring them in contact with people transiting China and have a higher likelihood of having the virus.

And, furthermore, you know exactly what I meant. So don’t bother trying to parse words.

What De Blasio did was a knee-jerk political response to Trump shutting down flights from China. There was no call for this.

99

I, too, read your previous posts as obfuscating the difference between Chinese-Americans and China. If anything, your last posts clinches it. (“directly associated with Chinese people.”)

Ugh.

100

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.