US Politics: Mad Max Beyond Corona Dome

[Rippounet]

46 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

In the end, this is going to kill in the US about the same order of magnitude of people that die in auto accidents annually.  And largely people with co-morbidities and a shorter life expectancy to begin with.  (Number check, about 35k die from auto accidents every year in the US, so 100k is still well within the same order of magnitude. 

I don't know where you get your numbers, but most estimates are between 200k and 1,7 million for the US.

And I don't think I'll offend anyone here by pointing out how badly equiped the US is to handle the crisis. Combine incompetent leadership, an individualistic ideology, and a ridiculously expensive healthcare system, and you have the potential for the US to be hit much worse than China.

In fact, some epidemiologists say 1M deaths is a rather conservative estimate for the US, assuming adequate measures are successfully implemented throughout the country.

[Fragile Bird]

If I catch Covid-19, my chance of dying is about 5%. If my risk of dying was 1 in 20 every time I got in my car, I would sell my car. My actually risk of dying (I looked it up a week or so ago) is something like 1 in 693 (US statistic) which is millions of miles driven divided by the numbers of death. Since I have a newish car with, I dunno, 5 or 6 airbags in it and I wear my seatbelt all the time and do very little highway driving these days, the odds for me are actually much better.

[mcbigski]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

The example you provided is nowhere close to what "pork" means.  What you mean is it's close to a "christmas tree bill" in which many unrelated floor amendments are added to omnibus bills - although in this case they're not amendments.

I suspect that the lion's share of that funding is going to go to government union employees whose dues fund Democrat campaign contributions, rather than actual battered people.  Would be nice to be wrong, but that's why it smells like pork to me.

1 hour ago, DanteGabriel said:

Adding funding related to domestic abuse is pork? What a hideous fucking ghoul you are.

Putting aside the personal attacks, let's say it's a trillion dollar spending bill.  How much of that is sufficient for first order Coronovirus treatment and containment?  If it's more than sufficient, then why is the spending so large if isn't full of pork?  If it isn't large enough, then why are taking our eyes off the ball?

I don't think domestic abuse is a risk factor for coronavirus transmission.  Is it?

37 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

I don't know where you get your numbers, but most estimates are between 200k and 1,7 million for the US.

And I don't think I'll offend anyone here by pointing out how badly equiped the US is to handle the crisis. Combine incompetent leadership, an individualistic ideology, and a ridiculously expensive healthcare system, and you have the potential for the US to be hit much worse than China.

In fact, some epidemiologists say 1M deaths is a rather conservative estimate for the US, assuming adequate measures are successfully implemented throughout the country.

All right.  So I'm on the under, and you're on the over.  Sounds like you're on the over at 1M too.  FWIW I bought casino, financial, energy and bio tech stocks on Friday and most of my extra cash is in now at these prices.  So I have skin in the game at this point, as far as which outcome is more likely.

[Martell Spy]

Quote

 

The two sides continue to squabble over boosting paid leave for sick workers and those caring for infected family members — a major issue for Democrats — as well as what kind of financial help the federal government can provide to distressed industries, such as the major U.S. airlines. The White House and Senate Republicans want several hundred billion dollars for impacted industries, said officials involved in the talks.

But there was significant progress during Saturday's negotiations on boosting unemployment insurance payments, a major source of contention between GOP and Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill. Senate Republicans have agreed to boost those payments by $250 billion, a major win for Democrats, said two sources familiar with the discussions. This will come on top of $250 billion in direct payments from the IRS to individual Americans, which President Donald Trump, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Senate Republicans have made their key priority.

 

And Senate GOP leaders and the White House conceded to a Democratic demand for tens of billions of dollars for hospitals and health-care providers as part of the rescue package.

Senate closing in on deal for $1.6 trillion rescue package
But several issues remain outstanding ahead of a critical procedural vote Sunday.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/21/senate-coronavirus-stimulus-negotiations-140334

[mcbigski]

24 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

If I catch Covid-19, my chance of dying is about 5%. If my risk of dying was 1 in 20 every time I got in my car, I would sell my car. My actually risk of dying (I looked it up a week or so ago) is something like 1 in 693 (US statistic) which is millions of miles driven divided by the numbers of death. Since I have a newish car with, I dunno, 5 or 6 airbags in it and I wear my seatbelt all the time and do very little highway driving these days, the odds for me are actually much better.

This map might be new information for you.  Speaks to the why NYC but not Canada question.  Though I have to wonder if there's some curve fitting going on here too.  Map is about 40% of the way down the page.

But here's the main point:

Quote

The University of Maryland mapped severe COVID-19 outbreaks with local weather patterns around the world, from the US to China. They found that the virus thrives in a certain temperature and humidity channel. “The researchers found that all cities experiencing significant outbreaks of COVID-19 have very similar winter climates with an average temperature of 41 to 52 degrees Fahrenheit, an average humidity level of 47% to 79% with a narrow east-west distribution along the same 30–50 N” latitude”, said the University of Maryland.

“Based on what we have documented so far, it appears that the virus has a harder time spreading between people in warmer, tropical climates,” said study leader Mohammad Sajadi, MD, Associate Professor of Medicine in the UMSOM, physician-scientist at the Institute of Human Virology and a member of GVN.

Which would mean that the sweet spot, so to speak, is going to move north over the next several weeks.  I suspect Canada and the midwest US would be less affected though, as the seasonal temperatures have a lot higher variance, and spend less time in the goldilocks zone than more coastal climates.

<Though highway driving is safer per mile than local driving, I've always been told>

[OldGimletEye]

1 hour ago, mcbigski said:

snip

You seem like you're a rational expectations (with complete markets of course) sort of person. Do you believe that stock investors are more or less  right about the fundamentals behind equity prices? And if so, what do you think that means for the economy?

[DMC]

24 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

I suspect that the lion's share of that funding is going to go to government union employees whose dues fund Democrat campaign contributions, rather than actual battered people.  Would be nice to be wrong, but that's why it smells like pork to me.

I strongly suspect it's funding relevant agencies - which, ya know, virtually all non-pork appropriations ever always do - as well as domestic violence shelters.  Probably something like this that Blumenthal pushed for a few months ago.  That's not remotely pork, and whining about the fact that means the funding is somehow "going" to government employees who are unionized because they are the ones who will be implementing the programs is about the dumbest thing ever.

[mcbigski]

19 minutes ago, DMC said:

I strongly suspect it's funding relevant agencies - which, ya know, virtually all non-pork appropriations ever always do - as well as domestic violence shelters.  Probably something like this that Blumenthal pushed for a few months ago.  That's not remotely pork, and whining about the fact that means the funding is somehow "going" to government employees who are unionized because they are the ones who will be implementing the programs is about the dumbest thing ever.

So he's hijacking the coronavirus concern to push at best tangentially related previous priorities through.  Someplace at least we can find common ground on.  Cheers.

(And frankly, shutting down huge swaths of the economy is probably worse for domestic tranquility.  Limited to this narrow slice for this discussion, I fear the cure is worse than the disease.)

24 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

You seem like you're a rational expectations (with complete markets of course) sort of person. Do you believe that stock investors are more or less  right about the fundamentals behind equity prices? And if so, what do you think that means for the economy?

If I have the terminology right, I'm weakly efficient market hypothesis.  With the kicker that as time approaches infinity, the market approaches the strong form. 

Part of the reason I put a number out there and said over or under is that people's rational thinking (in this case applied quantitatives) is pretty much independent of their emotional thinking.  While I happen to have enough toilet paper to last me until New Years, and am not claiming pure Vulcanhood by any means, I do think as long as someone isn't literally about to punch you in the face, it's helpful to consider the probabilities. (I've been buying the same 36 pack from BJs for over a decade and last month I rebought when I was merely running low instead of running out and saving my poops for the gym.)

[DMC]

25 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

So he's hijacking the coronavirus concern to push at best tangentially related previous priorities through.  [...]

(And frankly, shutting down huge swaths of the economy is probably worse for domestic tranquility.

The second sentence answers why prioritizing domestic violence funding is not just "tangential" to the coronavirus concern.

[mcbigski]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

The second sentence answers why prioritizing domestic violence funding is not just "tangential" to the coronavirus concern.

It's that painful to agree with me that you had to ellipsis the middle bit out?  Choose love bro.

[DMC]

Nah it just emphasized my point better to juxtapose the first sentence with the second sentence that I quoted.  Plus, we didn't find common ground there.

[OldGimletEye]

50 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

If I have the terminology right, I'm weakly efficient market hypothesis.  With the kicker that as time approaches infinity, the market approaches the strong form. 

Okay, and if you believe that, and then you believe corporate profits are about to fall, pretty dramatically.  Now why is that? And what should be done about it?

[Altherion]

2 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

If I catch Covid-19, my chance of dying is about 5%.

This is very unlikely to be the case and this probability is not knowable with currently available data. To make a statement of this nature, you have to know both the number of people who have had the virus and the number of people who died as a result. We have a reasonably good estimate of the second number in most jurisdictions, but we don't know the first number even within an order of magnitude for any jurisdiction because the disease can be very mild or even asymptomatic. To figure it out, we'd either have to be exhaustively testing everyone in a jurisdiction for the virus throughout the course of the epidemic (which nobody did -- testing only ramps up when serious cases are encountered) or test a large number of people for the antibodies to the virus (this is difficult and usually happens long after the virus is gone because it tends to require blood rather than saliva and because our medical system is currently short on capacity even without this).

[Fragile Bird]

13 minutes ago, Altherion said:

This is very unlikely to be the case 

(snip)

Nah. Once you are over 60 the statistics are pretty darn clear.

[ThinkerX]

I am starting to wonder,,,

 

Trump, as a narcissist, desperately needs the affirmation from his campaign rallies.  He also needs his golf, and has a deep seated contempt for 'little people.'  Now, the adoration of the campaign rallies is replaced by occasionally critical questions in the briefing room, Mar-El-Lago (sp?)) is shut down, presumably along with similar refuges, and he is being pressed to support the sort of generally beneficial legislation that runs directly counter to his nature.  More, this situation shows no prospect of improvement over the next couple months, minimum.

 

So, given that, how long until Trump snaps mentally?  As in looses the ability to function?

[Centrist Simon Steele]

7 hours ago, The Great Unwashed said:

I'm still holding out hope for you.

Re: the op-ed, I posted nearly exactly the same thing a few days ago. From a pure political perspective, this was a crisis tailor-made for Democrats, and they STILL managed to screw the pooch. How do you managed to get out-messaged by Tom-fucking-Cotton of all people???

I read that the number of Dems who approved how Trump handled/s this situation was around 15 percent a week ago. That's up to 30 percent this week.

I'm not shocked. People need help, and the Dems, whether they're actually doing something or not, are presenting themselves as not wanting to directly help people. I heard Trump's "tantrum" at the reporter yesterday (day before?), and I found myself thinking, "He isn't throwing a tantrum. He seems annoyed." And then I shut down the internet and went to bed because I would have never have rationalized his behavior, ever, any time before. For the first time since he descended the escalator, I found myself thinking, "he's making some good points." Of course he's not. But my gut/fear/worries reacted before my rational side could. 

People need help. Where's Joe Biden? I haven't heard anything from him. I thought he was our leader!

[DireWolfSpirit]

4 hours ago, mcbigski said:

This map might be new information for you.  Speaks to the why NYC but not Canada question.  Though I have to wonder if there's some curve fitting going on here too.  Map is about 40% of the way down the page.

But here's the main point:

Which would mean that the sweet spot, so to speak, is going to move north over the next several weeks.  I suspect Canada and the midwest US would be less affected though, as the seasonal temperatures have a lot higher variance, and spend less time in the goldilocks zone than more coastal climates.

<Though highway driving is safer per mile than local driving, I've always been told>

I couldn't view that map, I got this message when I clicked on it.

410

This post is under investigation or was found in violation of the Medium Rules.

 

[DireWolfSpirit]

So hive mind question, I tried Google but didn't find info yet.

Question is- Does anyone know where I can view a state by state list of covid cases per capita?

Several sites list the total cases and deaths for each state, but I've yet to find a place that tells me how many cases as a percentage of population?

[karaddin]

I've seen quite a bit of chatter on Twitter today about Biden being completely absent. Has he actually been silent in a way to justify worrying about his health situation?

It's definitely not what I'd expect a candidate to do during a crisis.

[Ran]

25 minutes ago, karaddin said:

I've seen quite a bit of chatter on Twitter today about Biden being completely absent. Has he actually been silent in a way to justify worrying about his health situation?

It's definitely not what I'd expect a candidate to do during a crisis.

He was talking with reporters on Friday about the situation, and is planning to hold shadow briefings starting this week.