The Trump Administration: A Clusterfuck in the Making Part Deux (Part 1)

Let’s say that smoking is bad for you.

And let’s say that we really don’t want teenagers to smoke, so we spend $1.5b every year trying to convince them to not smoke.

The impact of this $1.5b is that we’ve helped to support the lifestyle of advertising executives, and kids start smoking at age 14, just as regularly - if not moreso - than if we’d never done a thing.

Likewise, we have spent all sorts of money on abstinence only education because, you know, if you don’t want to get pregnant nor contract an STD then that’s really the gold standard. So how many people here think that teens and young adults refrain from sex as much as they should, if they were being sane and responsible?

The “go and be free, my children!” approach to the pandemic is already the reality on the ground. Teenagers are going out, partying it up, and mixing all their juices at every chance that they can. Upper-middle aged people, who were mostly working desk jobs, are taking a more cautious approach to the matter, working from home, wearing masks, etc. And the elderly are on strict lockdown, living in somewhat nicer prisons than if they had been convicted of a crime.

The best policy is the best policy, but it’s not reality. You can dump a billion dollars into masks and tell all the teens that their risk of death from disease this year is 0.19% rather than 0.01%, because of Covid-19, and they will give zero fucks and go right out and do all the things that they’re going to do anyways.

There are only so many billions of dollars in the world, and only so many people available to do work. So you can spend your money hiring advertising executives to convince humans that they need to turn into rational, dependable robots for 12 months - because that will work - or you can spend the billion making sure that old folks are getting safe entertainment, lots of human communication, etc. so that they’re not dying of loneliness, a lack of sunlight, and depression. You can make sure that the people taking care of those places are regularly tested and have a supply chain for their life to make sure that the people they but groceries from are regularly tested and that they have someone safe to look later their kids. You can make sure that stores and buses and everything have scheduled times that separate people in different risk groups - no teens allowed on the bus, but twice a day - etc.

We can try to force a reality that won’t happen on everyone or accept that we’ve already proved, in history, that that doesn’t work, accept that humans are humans, and try to guide them on the path that they’re already going to take. We can make it better and more optimal or we can resist reality.

Nope, there are indeed a lot of maskholes and people that do not want to have quarantines, but even in Arizona masks and social distancing and closure of big events or crowd gatherings is in effect.

The point here is that you were wrong on the modelings not having been done before, and you are even wrong on what it is going on, not in a very organized way as it should, yes; but enforcement of the policies is there and more people are following it.

More education, and better leadership, is needed still.

Trump warns us of the coronavirus surge in New Zealand:

“You’ve seen what’s going on in New Zealand?” Trump said of the island nation, which went months without any new covid-19 cases. “Big surge in New Zealand. It’s terrible. We don’t want that.”

Sage: Teenagers are stupid.
GIGO: Civil libertarians are only in Arizona.

I agree, civil libertarians are, probably, an insignificant factor. …Why are we talking about them? I’m pretty sure that they weren’t mentioned by me and that I was pretty specific about who I was talking about.

As of yet, I have only seen any indications that lockdown is better than no lockdown. I came to the same result with some simple math, here, several months ago:

I have not changed my view - and that’s largely because the math hasn’t changed.

As for a model that covers option B, as opposed to the differences between the Control case and option A, depending on the numbers, I can get between double or half the fatality count versus option A:

With the current set of numbers, we have:

Control

  • Sick (ever): 282k
  • Immune (ever): 84k
  • Deaths: 11k

Quarantine-light

  • Sick (ever): 29k
  • Immune (ever): 2k
  • Deaths: 930

Risk-targeting

  • Sick (ever): 183k
  • Immune (ever): 64k
  • Deaths: 926

Actual results will vary by run and how strict you are with Grandma.

What isn’t included are things like how much sunlight Grandma is getting nor how the economy is doing.

That is fine, but economists that know better do not follow you.

Grossly missing on your calculations is the most likely health treatment costs.

Regardless of whether they follow me, I follow them, or we both ignore each other, my results agree with their results and that has no bearing on what is being discussed. It’s a straw man. Those are unrelated models to what is being discussed.

So was Humpty Dumpty and it did not work for him. He just got ignored.

If you do want to be taken seriously it is clear that you have great information to publish and get others to listen to you. /s

I’m not holding my breath for you to do so.

Choosing to not read any sarcasm into your text, I wish that I could develop a proper model and had the time and money to do so. At the moment, the best hope that someone will give a proper look at option B is that Atlas will be able to move some money that direction. At the moment, as said, no one is performing that analysis.

Choosing to read sarcasm into your post: Pre-emptively choosing what a person’s position is and aggressively expending a motivated reading onto what they write is not a strong position for argument. As best I can tell, you don’t even know what I’m saying since you’ve flopped all of it out, in your mind, with what you decided I was going to say.

Maskholes are idiotic morons who are getting people killed.

Lockdown is good for the economy.

Covid-19, as best I can tell, is 19 times more fatal than the flu, not 10x more fatal, as you said.

These are all my genuine, heartfelt positions. If you think I’m on the opposite side as you and you read what I write to align with Trump and the maskholes, then I can’t help you. You can read what I wrote or use advanced motivated reading and masturbate in enjoyment at your own cleverness. But are you clever enough to figure out how I can agree with you on all points and not be on your side?

They were, and it still guides the experts on what they do recommend.

Actually you helped me there, by making the calculations that the experts already cited to be even more valid.

Then link to it. I want to see the results.

(Quote edited with my understanding of what you were saying, for clarity. Apologies if I misread.)

Actually, I found one:

So Individual 1 has pardoned Susan B. Anthony, who was convicted of voter fraud. The same Susan B. Anthony who said she did not want a pardon.

Already did, you skipped 2 estimates in post #2443

And then others still independently find why it still makes economical and human sense to lock down. At least in a targeted way if not a complete one. As this economist from New Zealand posts:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/300083404/heres-why-lockdowns-are-the-best-economic-solution-too

Experience from the last lockdown

There were large economic costs during the lockdown, but later economic activity was higher and so far we are better off by about $6 billion than if we had not pursued this strategy, because of the extent to which our economy could bounce back. The longer the restrictions, the larger the costs. Lives saved are worth $1.4b or $13.6b, depending on the approach chosen.

The economic cost

The economic cost associated with the lockdown was very large. I compared the New Zealand experience with Sweden, which has taken a more voluntary approach on movement restrictions, making it a good case study.

In the three months to June, the number of hours worked fell by 9 per cent from a year ago, similar to Sweden. But mobility and economic activity has remained low in Sweden since then, while many indicators had rebounded to near normal levels in New Zealand, before the renewed restrictions came into place last week.

We estimate nearly $10b of lost economic output during April, compared to Sweden’s approach. But in the following months, our economy bounced back more strongly. In the four months to July, we estimate New Zealand’s economic activity was $6.2b higher than if we had followed the same economic profile as Sweden.

Who’s re-writing American history and erasing the struggles of American heroes now? :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

They’re about the control case versus option A. I’m talking about option B.

What about our precious bodily fluids?

You need to show that they do not take that into account, in reality that is assumed, otherwise there would not be lines like what would had taken place “if we had followed the same economic profile” as the countries that did not do much of lockdown or none at all.

So my statement was that I am NOT talking about “doing nothing” and that I also am NOT talking about “lockdown”. And your rebuttal was that, clearly they are talking about what I’m talking about because they mention “doing nothing” and “lockdown”? :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

Are you sure about your argument?

So what was your argument then? This is, sticking to Trump’s actions, about how Trump is an idiot for listening to the likes of Atlas.

I’d suggest rereading my previous posts, including specifically #2495. Someone has modeled it, after all.

See also: I've been asked to help with our community's reopening

And, then, go back and re-read what Atlas wrote. The world will look different when you’re not viewing everything through the vision that everyone who says anything outside the Orthodox is an lying shill for “the other side”.

Trump is an idiot, regardless. Atlas, as best I can tell, is not. You’ve just failed to read honestly. Sorry.