International Thread 4

[The Anti-Targ]

In other news that might not surprise people.

https://www.globalgovernmentforum.com/majority-of-countries-showing-little-progress-in-tackling-corruption/?utm_source=GGF+Global+Subscriber+List&utm_campaign=a6ea76a188-21%3A00+Timezone&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_be045faa37-a6ea76a188-197435505

Quote

Majority of countries showing little progress in tackling corruption

Little progress

The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), which aggregates expert data from 12 independent sources such as the World Bank, World Economic Forum, and the Economist Intelligence Unit, ranks countries with a score of zero (most corrupt) to 100 (clean).

This year’s rankings revealed that the majority of countries are showing little progress at tackling corruption, with 137 showing little or no change compared to previous years. In line with 2018 scores, more than two thirds of countries scored lower than 50, with an overall average score of 43.

Twenty-two countries have significantly improved their CPI scores over the past eight years with Greece, Guyana and Estonia showing the biggest increases. At the other end of the scale, Canada, Australia and Nicaragua showed the largest decreases.

The number of countries where corruption levels are declining significantly is growing, with 16 countries in the 2018 index compared to 21 countries in this latest research.

One to watch

The report highlighted Canada as a country to watch due to a decline of four points since last year and seven points since 2012. While Canada is consistently a top performer with a score of 77, the campaign group say low enforcement of anti-corruption laws is evident for example, the recent case against construction company Montreal-based SNC-Lavalin, which allegedly paid US$48m (€44m) in bribes to Libyan officials.

If you want to see where your country sits: https://www.transparency.org/cpi2019

Also looks like the USA dipped below 70 for the first time ever / in a long time. Noting that the USA was on a downward trend before Trump took office. And the drop put Uruguay and the UAE ahead of the USA for what appears to be the first time ever.

Even the golden children NZ and Demark have taken a wee tumble. Still #1, but in the 80's now rather than the 90s.

[Zorral]

As has been said in many times and many places before, but it is true, the world's going to hell in a handbasket.  We see it and feel all around us -- and it ain't Love Naturally, babee!

[Platypus Rex]

9 hours ago, Fez said:

Certainly no reason for complacency, but at the same time I don't see the need for panic. So far its 132 reported deaths on approximately 6,000 infections. Whereas the flu, this year alone in the US alone, has had an estimated 8,200 to 20,000 deaths on 15 to 20 million infections.

It is rarely a good idea to panic, unless you are being chased by a bear, and need a little extra speed.  But there is no harm in saying one's prayers, making one's peace with God, singing "Bad Moon Rising", and being emotionally prepared to kiss one's precious ass goodbye.

Your comparison to the (regular) flu makes no sense.  The regular flu is a completely out-of-control disease, that sweeps through the entire World Population of 7 billion people with such regularity that we call it the "seasonal flu".  We cannot contain it, and cannot eradicate it.  We can only live with it (and die with it), with more or less the same attitudes and precautions we have now, give or take, and thank Heaven that it's mortality rate is as low as it is.  Valar Morghulis, and all that.

And perhaps, if it cannot be contained, we will have to live (and die) with this new flu as well.  But wait until the current outbreak has spread out of control, and ravaged the entire planet many times over for years on end (assuming we cannot stop it and/or contain it), before you  compare the costs and death rates.

Keep in mind the 132 deaths you refer to have been all been in the last 20 days, mostly in the city where it all started - one of the few places where folks have been infected long enough to start dying.  The daily death rate has been accelerating, and it is by no means clear that it has leveled out.  

8 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

That’s an interesting point.  Are people more inclined to panic because a disease is new than one they are familiar with but don’t realize how dangerous it actually is?

I suspect the Chinese authorities, with their top down autarchy, suppression of information, and bureaucracy, are more than capable of bungling this in all kinds of ways.  But I refuse to believe they have taken the unprecedented step of quarantining entire cities, and taking a major economic hit in the process, merely because they were triggered by the word "new".  

[Platypus Rex]

Another day, another coronavirus update.  Now it's 7786 confirmed cases, and 170 deaths.  So that's +38 deaths in the last 24 hours.   Looks like the daily death rate (at least) is still accelerating.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 hours ago, dornishpen said:

A lot of the world is already against Israel and that has long been the case, that's probably increasing, but there's always been significant opposition. 

That's the point.

Quote

Bibi may be done soon (we can only hope) with his indictment and eroding support, but I'm not sure how much Gantz is willing to compromise, though except Bibi, every PM since Rabin has come to the conclusion that more compromise than the Israeli public wants is necessary, so there is hope, and the papers leaked about the negotiations between Olmert and Abbas showed that under Abbas the Palestinians were willing to compromise more than their public wants. 

This really gets to the heart of the issue. Both sides need to compromise more and I have a hard time seeing either side doing so right now. There's simply too much bad blood. And that being said, at least the planned annexation seems to be put on hold.

Quote

I can only see the US abandoning Israel on a partisan basis depending on who controls the White House unless something changes religiously in this country to make evangicals abandon Christian Zionism (and for some their dreams of Armageddon etc.)

Probably.

3 hours ago, ljkeane said:

It's pretty unlikely that the state of Israel is going to be destroyed in anything like the foreseeable future but the less viable a two state solution is made (and it's pretty far gone at this stage) the more you're only left with a one state solution. That's either an effectively apartheid state or not clearly a Jewish State anymore.

This is basically what I meant. I didn't mean destroyed militarily. I think they're going to rejected a two state solution, leading to an increase in the appearance of an apartheid state followed by global pressure that leads to an Israel that's not a Jewish state anymore. And I do think it's important to have a Jewish state given how few of us there are.

[dornishpen]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

This is basically what I meant. I didn't mean destroyed militarily. I think they're going to rejected a two state solution, leading to an increase in the appearance of an apartheid state followed by global pressure that leads to an Israel that's not a Jewish state anymore. And I do think it's important to have a Jewish state given how few of us there are.

I think the rise in antisemitism shows having a Jewish state is still important. And yes a one state solution leads to either a non-Jewish majority eventually or apartheid and the second shouldn't be a viable option. So I think two states is the only real answer long term.

[Platypus Rex]

6 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

So, the 'flu has a case fatality rate of 0.04% - 0.13%, and this coronavirus has a case fatality rate of 2.2%. I'm not sure your quoting of statistics is particularly comforting here. At this stage the coronavirus appears to be between 16 and 55 times more deadly than 'flu. Of course that's not the full picture, because all the deaths so far are in China where it's possible a lot of the deaths were in part due to lower quality health care, and the US might have a lower case fatality rate for 'flu than most of the rest of the world. And the 'flu case fatality rate would be much higher if millions of vulnerable individuals weren't vaccinated.

But still, there is a case to be made that this new virus could be more deadly than 'flu.

It is definitely more deadly than the flu.  This is not a situation where 2.2% of patients survive and 97.8% recover.  This is a situation where 2.2% have died, 1.6% have recovered, and 96.2% are still sick and might still die. 

If you use the figures for Hubei province, at the epicenter, you get 3.5% ratio of deaths to total cases.  Why?  Because more people at the epicenter have been infected for longer periods, and have had more time to die.  And I don't have the numbers for the City of Wuhan, which is epicenter within Hubai, but I've heard the analogous ratio there is at least 5.5%.  Obviously, the final mortality rate would have to be significantly higher than any of these figures.

[The Anti-Targ]

The case fatality rate may end up going up or down in the end. Viruses do tend to attenuate to some extent in a population over time. I have no idea about the demographics and immune status of those currently infected so if there is a high proportion of particularly vulnerable types of people among those currently infected then fatality rates may be higher.

There's too much unknown at this point to draw any conclusions other than it does cause fatalities.

Info from our embassy in Beijing is that people are being randomly stopped on the street and temperature taken, and if you have a high temperature you are put into a quarantine facility.

[Platypus Rex]

5 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

The case fatality rate may end up going up or down in the end.

In the end?  Sure.  It could wipe out half the population, and the rest could be resistant.  Or someone could come up with a vaccine.  Or better yet, the disease could be quarantined, isolated, and eliminated.

5 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Viruses do tend to attenuate to some extent in a population over time.

Well, I'll console myself with that thought if the virus ever comes to devastate my community.  It might be better, though, if it could be prevented from spreading.

5 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I have no idea about the demographics and immune status of those currently infected so if there is a high proportion of particularly vulnerable types of people among those currently infected then fatality rates may be higher.

A high proportion of the initial deaths consisted of the most vulnerable who became sickest fastest.   As more deaths appeared, so did deaths of patients without apparent risk factors.  Meanwhile, many of those who lacked obvious symptoms were contageous, and just kept spreading the disease around.

5 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

There's too much unknown at this point to draw any conclusions other than it does cause fatalities.

It's too early to predict the end of the world, but we know a bit more than that.

[Varysblackfyre321]

2 hours ago, dornishpen said:

I think the rise in antisemitism shows having a Jewish state is still important. And yes a one state solution leads to either a non-Jewish majority eventually or apartheid and the second shouldn't be a viable option. So I think two states is the only real answer long term.

And there’s always the possibility  of trying to ethnically cleansing the region of Palestinians. 

I sadly see that or apartheid as the only likely outcomes with the way things are going.

It’d reflect poorly on Israel, but no one would seriously intercede on the Palestinians behalf.

America will never turn away from it-some for practical reasons(America is not getting nothing out of the relationship) but mostly because of Evangelicals need Israel to continue expanding so Jesus could combat, send the Jews and everyone else to Hell, and take them to heaven.

I can imagine many people referencing the Palestinians refusal of Peace proposals like the one Israel just offered would be reference for why they had no choice but get rid of them, or institute an unequivocally racist system.

I imagine that was the main point in even drafting it in the first place-just so the Palestinians could reject it.

I can also people bigotry in their own societies-even if they don’t particularly care about the type of bigotries in Palestinian society as reason enough for their rights shouldn’t be respected. Which is a common tactic for people wanting to Muslim groups in the West. Pretending their bigotry comes from a place of care for some real social injustice. In the last thread there was a discussion on France banning the Burkini. Some claimed this specific type of dress was oppressing women. Nor did the people claiming such actually care. It was just an attempt to downplay/distract from/justify, the fact a western government doing something that may actually be doing something that violates the rights of women-Muslim women.

[Fez]

10 hours ago, Platypus Rex said:

It is definitely more deadly than the flu.  This is not a situation where 2.2% of patients survive and 97.8% recover.  This is a situation where 2.2% have died, 1.6% have recovered, and 96.2% are still sick and might still die. 

If you use the figures for Hubei province, at the epicenter, you get 3.5% ratio of deaths to total cases.  Why?  Because more people at the epicenter have been infected for longer periods, and have had more time to die.  And I don't have the numbers for the City of Wuhan, which is epicenter within Hubai, but I've heard the analogous ratio there is at least 5.5%.  Obviously, the final mortality rate would have to be significantly higher than any of these figures.

My point isn't the mortality rate, my point is the scope. The numbers seem high until you think about just how many people die or get sick from much more mundane things. Could this new virus become just as widespread? Maybe, sure, and that would be really bad. But there's lots of bad things with the potential to go truly widespread and don't.

The 2014-16 ebola outbreak had 11,325 deaths and 28,652 confirmed and suspected infections. There was real concern it could go wide and that would've been a nightmare. But health care and public safety professionals did amazing jobs and dealt with the situation. There was no need for the rest of us to engage in rampant speculation and panic.

[Paxter]

32 minutes ago, Fez said:

My point isn't the mortality rate, my point is the scope. The numbers seem high until you think about just how many people die or get sick from much more mundane things. Could this new virus become just as widespread? Maybe, sure, and that would be really bad. But there's lots of bad things with the potential to go truly widespread and don't.

The 2014-16 ebola outbreak had 11,325 deaths and 28,652 confirmed and suspected infections. There was real concern it could go wide and that would've been a nightmare. But health care and public safety professionals did amazing jobs and dealt with the situation. There was no need for the rest of us to engage in rampant speculation and panic.

Ebola is not the greatest comparison, given the transmission mechanism.

I'm also not sure health authorities did a uniformly good job in addressing Ebola (unless you are referring only to national authorities in Western countries). The WHO has certainly received a lot of (justifiable) criticism. For example, it didn't declare Ebola a Public Health Emergency of International Concern until several months had elapsed from the outbreak.

[Zorral]

Quote

 

The United States confirmed a sixth U.S. case of the Wuhan coronavirus Thursday, marking the first time the virus has spread from person to person in the United States.

Chinese officials added more than 1,500 new cases of the coronavirus on the same day, as countries stepped up their efforts to evacuate their citizens trapped in Wuhan, at the epicenter of the growing outbreak.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/china-coronavirus-live-updates/2020/01/30/1da6ea52-4302-11ea-b5fc-eefa848cde99_story.html

Mayor de Blasio says, with NYC having the largest Asian population anywhere outside of Asia, the question about coronavirus breaking out here isn't 'if' but 'when.'  Masks are useless, but as with other contagious infections, all the same other precautions apply, such as careful coughing and washing hands, and keeping hands off face.

But Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross says how good for us the plague will be.

 ...."that China’s loss might be America’s gain, because the coronavirus outbreak could prompt employers to move jobs to the United States. ow good this will be for the US."

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/30/world/asia/coronavirus-china.html?

 

 

 

[The Anti-Targ]

Is it really possible for a senior govt official to be that callous? I mean even if it is true, which it probably won't be. You just don't say that sort of thing as or on behalf of a government. Jeez!

Anyway, in possibly good news about the virus, this one, so far, is the least deadly of the zoonotic viruses to cause outbreaks in the last 50 years.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/how-wuhan-coronavirus-compares-to-other-outbreaks-pandemics-2020-1?r=US&IR=T

Quote

One chart shows how the Wuhan coronavirus compares to other major outbreaks and pandemics in the last 50 years

Here’s how the Wuhan outbreak compares to other major virus outbreaks in the last 50 years. So far, the coronavirus has the lowest fatality rate.

Though it could be the most contagious, or possibly 2nd behind H1N1. So it could be touch and go whether this virus becomes endemic in humans and becomes another human viral disease that permanently circulates in the population. It may depend on how immune people are after they have had the disease once (and survived). If it's a virus that mutates frequently (which RNA viruses tend to have a reputation for) then getting the disease once may not make you immune from getting it again in future, just like 'flu and the common cold. And if a vaccine is developed whether the vaccine will still work after mutations have occurred or whether manufacturers will have to chase the virus constantly to develop new vaccine strains on an ongoing basis, like with 'flu.

[Platypus Rex]

12 hours ago, Fez said:

My point isn't the mortality rate, my point is the scope. The numbers seem high until you think about just how many people die or get sick from much more mundane things.

The numbers seem high when you consider how recently this strain emerged, and the speed that it is spreading and killing people.   And they still seem high, even after you consider more mundane things.  Your comparison is silly.  Period.

Quote

Could this new virus become just as widespread? Maybe, sure, and that would be really bad.

That's why people are concerned.  Even if it becomes one tenth as widespread, that would be a major public health disaster.

 

Quote

But there's lots of bad things with the potential to go truly widespread and don't.

We've gotten lucky and dodged a few bullets in the past, sure.  We may do so again.

Quote

The 2014-16 ebola outbreak had 11,325 deaths and 28,652 confirmed and suspected infections.

It is only a little over a month since this strain was first identified, and only 3 weeks since the first death.  And you think it is meaningful to compare that to a time span of 2 or 3 years???  We had 36 new deaths reported yesterday.  Multiply that by 2-3 years and see what you get.  Of course it won't stay stable.  It will probably either start to get stamped out, or continue to accelerate.  And as for "confirmed and suspected infections", there are already more than 28,000.  Only 8,000 people have been tested and diagnosed ("confirmed"), but virtually everyone understands that that is only the top of a large unknown iceberg ("suspected").  Some experts are saying that 100,000 infections is not an unreasonable estimate.  And that's not a forecast; it is an estimate of what we have currently.

Quote

There was real concern it could go wide and that would've been a nightmare.

Certainly.  Ebola is still a concern.  It has not been eradicated, and there is still a possibility that it could go pandemic.

Quote

But health care and public safety professionals did amazing jobs and dealt with the situation. There was no need for the rest of us to engage in rampant speculation and panic.

Panic is rarely a good idea.  I don't know why you are accusing me of recommending panic.  In such situation, a responsible citizen should remain calm and cooperate with public health authorities.  This is one of those problems that the People need a Government for.

But I am a democrat.  I disagree with any commie/fascist notion (take your pick) that we lowly plebs should mind our own business, stick our heads in the sand, and let the Daddy State take care of our frightened asses.  At the very least, we are allowed to talk about it.

But if you want to defer to the authorities, you might be interested that the WHO just met today, and declared this an international public health emergency.

[Platypus Rex]

Wuhan Coronavirus:  Death toll now stands at 213, due to an additional 43 deaths since China's last daily update.  Total number of confirmed infection cases are 9,692.

[Spockydog]

I need to get me a few hundredweight of tinned baked beans and one of those walls covered in guns.

 

[Platypus Rex]

15 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

I need to get me a few hundredweight of tinned baked beans and one of those walls covered in guns.

 

I'm not sure I'd trust you to use the baked beans responsibly.

[A True Kaniggit]

12 minutes ago, Platypus Rex said:

I'm not sure I'd trust you to use the baked beans responsibly.

Don’t worry. He has a license to own those baked beans. Safety first when it comes to baked beans!

[DireWolfSpirit]

9 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Is it really possible for a senior govt official to be that callous? I mean even if it is true, which it probably won't be. You just don't say that sort of thing as or on behalf of a government. Jeez!

He's the same idiot that announced nothing needs to be done about climate change because, "Well can't people just move?" (If their local climate is bad)

The dude is a serial grifter as well, it is known-

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2018/08/06/new-details-about-wilbur-rosss-businesses-point-to-pattern-of-grifting/