aginlakeway said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

Hi, Im Brett said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

It was hypothetical. I said what if... I also never specified USA only.

You're getting off topic because you can't answer the question. You don't know the answer. You're just emotionally fueled because what's done is done. **** happens. We can do it different in the future, but we are committed to fighting this thing now. There will be major implications in the trillions of dollars yes, but there likely would have been if we didn't lock down businesses and ask people to stay home.

---

We will never know whether this is true.

---

We will never know if the economic impacts would have been worse in the long run had we not done what we are doing now. There. Want to keep playing what if's?

---

Nope. The only thing anyone can know with certainty is their own situation. That calculation is an easy one.

---

This is simply not true, and quite frankly, the crux of the issue. Some people are invincible until they're not.

I don't lean strongly one way or the other, but the middle is a lonely place these days.

---

What?? You do not think I can accurately predict my economic risk if we did nothing and let this virus burn through several million people. I absolutely can. It will have zero impact on my industry. Hell, everyone above 65 could die and it would have zero effect on my industry. It is entirely a young man's game.

As for personal risk. I have about a 1 in 200 chance of dying from this. I have taken far greater risks with my personal safety for far less money than 1 in 200.

I know my individual health and economic risk.

---

It's closer to 1 in 20,000 isn't it? Or higher.

---

I am assuming I get infected plus my individual health situation. If it is actually 1 in 20K. Yolo.

Proposition Joe said:

---

Three replies, zero with any medical background?

---

Richard Epstein doesnt have a medical background either but is a medical ethicist. Watch the video and you'll find he's clearly biased but can we trust him considering he didn't go to med school?
https://reason.com/video/dont-expect-millions-to-die-from-coronavirus-says-richard-epstein/

Captain Pablo said:

---

This country is gonna be singing a different tune in about a week and a half

Wait and see

---

If that's the case, and I hope it is...it'll be because of the social distancing and shutting down efforts that began ~2 weeks ago, and much more in-full last week.

Wont' mean it was right or wrong, but if we curb this thing in that timeline, which I think we will too...then it 'worked' from that perspective.

You a numbers guy?

Philip J Fry said:

---

You a numbers guy?

---

Nope. I just know my industry will not be affected by deaths of 50+. It can only be impacted by shutdowns.

Time will tell. I'm hoping we are 2 weeks from recognizing that the threat is manageable and things can start to calm down and begin the return to normal. In 2 weeks we should have enough data to make calculated decisions.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Let's not keep up the false dichotomy. You don't need blind trust to agree, and trust but verify is a good way to go forward. I don't think most of us are very far off in how we view this or what the correct response is.

Few are in the do nothing camp - though some are, and at this point they're either sociopaths or narcissists like the_fox (and I mean that in the nicest way possible buddy), they're under-informed, or for whatever reason they are drawing massively different conclusions from the same information others are looking at. If we put a nice interpretation on it these folks are commendably looking out for their own self-interest and the economic interest of others, if at the expense of lives.

Few are in the - shut it down forever camp. But some are, and those people are either bleeding hearts, under-informed, or for whatever reason are drawing massively different conclusions from the same information others are looking at. If we put a nice interpretation on it these folks are commendably looking out for their own self-interest and the physical interest of others, if at the expense of economic cost.

Most of us are in the do-something-but-it-needs-to-be-reasonable camp.

---

I didn't intend my post as a false dichotomy and I made the point because I agree with you hat most are in the, "do something reasonable" boat. There is legitimate disagreement over what reasonable means and, as I've posted before, government directed curtailment of our 1st amendment rights should be questioned. I think so far the curtailments have been reasonable but I don't accept them blindly and without question. Sorry for the confusion.

Didnt mean it to sound like a reproach, meant for the room more than you.

Proposition Joe said:

---

Two different frontline doctors from two different states JUST ON TEXAGS have posted this is bad, really bad.

And you've got guys who are in sales for a living questioning if they really know what they are talking about.

We are living in Idiocracy.

---

I guess this Nobel Laureate is President Comacho:
https://www.jpost.com/HEALTH-SCIENCE/Israeli-nobel-laureate-Coronavirus-spread-is-slowing-621145

Quote:

---

THE REASON for the slowdown is due to the fact that exponential models assume that people with the virus will continue to infect others at a steady rate. In the early phase of COVID-19, that rate was 2.2 people a day on average.

"In exponential growth models, you assume that new people can be infected every day, because you keep meeting new people," Levitt said. "But, if you consider your own social circle, you basically meet the same people every day. You can meet new people on public transportation, for example; but even on the bus, after some time most passengers will either be infected or immune.

"However, that doesn't mean Levitt is dismissive of the precautions being put in place by governments around the world.

"You don't hug every person you meet on the street now, and you'll avoid meeting face to face with someone that has a cold, like we did," Levitt said. "The more you adhere, the more you can keep infection in check. So, under these circumstances, a carrier will only infect 1.5 people every three days and the rate will keep going down."

---

Also in regards to the infections from the Diamond Princess:

Quote:

---

"Those are extremely comfortable conditions for the virus and still, only 20% were infected. It is a lot, but pretty similar to the infection rate of the common flu," Levitt said. Based on those figures, his conclusion was that most people are simply naturally immune.

---

In a world of fast moving data and conflicting information, who are we supposed to believe and when?

R0 of 2.2 = ~55% of people get before herd immunity ends it.
R0 of 1.5 = ~50% of people (his number)
R0 of 1.3 = ~33% of people (common flu)

And we stopped the Diamond Princess "experiment" at ~20%. We don't have that luxury for, say, NYC.

Captain Pablo said:

---

This country is gonna be singing a different tune in about a week and a half

Wait and see

---

True. But probably not in the way you think.

The_Fox said:

---

Hi, Im Brett said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

It was hypothetical. I said what if... I also never specified USA only.

You're getting off topic because you can't answer the question. You don't know the answer. You're just emotionally fueled because what's done is done. **** happens. We can do it different in the future, but we are committed to fighting this thing now. There will be major implications in the trillions of dollars yes, but there likely would have been if we didn't lock down businesses and ask people to stay home.

---

We will never know whether this is true.

---

We will never know if the economic impacts would have been worse in the long run had we not done what we are doing now. There. Want to keep playing what if's?

---

Nope. The only thing anyone can know with certainty is their own situation. That calculation is an easy one.

---

This is simply not true, and quite frankly, the crux of the issue. Some people are invincible until they're not.

I don't lean strongly one way or the other, but the middle is a lonely place these days.

---

What?? You do not think I can accurately predict my economic risk if we did nothing and let this virus burn through several million people. I absolutely can. It will have zero impact on my industry. Hell, everyone above 65 could die and it would have zero effect on my industry. It is entirely a young man's game.

As for personal risk. I have about a 1 in 200 chance of dying from this. I have taken far greater risks with my personal safety for far less money than 1 in 200.

I know my individual health and economic risk.

---

Even if true, your industry has nothing to do with the original blanket statement I replied to.

This whole situation becomes a lot easier to manage if everyone had your ability to see into the future.

I'm not arguing numbers only trying to illustrate that even amongst experts and other really smart people there are differing opinions, analyses and perspectives of the same data. Making universal claims based on localized anecdotes isn't really doing anyone any favors.

That being said preliminary studies and research suggested a r0 between 2 and 3. There's a big difference between 2 and 3 and a very big difference between 1.5 and 3. If we can get the r0 down below 1.5, I'd be willing to say we've done a pretty good job.

Hi, Im Brett said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

Hi, Im Brett said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

It was hypothetical. I said what if... I also never specified USA only.

You're getting off topic because you can't answer the question. You don't know the answer. You're just emotionally fueled because what's done is done. **** happens. We can do it different in the future, but we are committed to fighting this thing now. There will be major implications in the trillions of dollars yes, but there likely would have been if we didn't lock down businesses and ask people to stay home.

---

We will never know whether this is true.

---

We will never know if the economic impacts would have been worse in the long run had we not done what we are doing now. There. Want to keep playing what if's?

---

Nope. The only thing anyone can know with certainty is their own situation. That calculation is an easy one.

---

This is simply not true, and quite frankly, the crux of the issue. Some people are invincible until they're not.

I don't lean strongly one way or the other, but the middle is a lonely place these days.

---

What?? You do not think I can accurately predict my economic risk if we did nothing and let this virus burn through several million people. I absolutely can. It will have zero impact on my industry. Hell, everyone above 65 could die and it would have zero effect on my industry. It is entirely a young man's game.

As for personal risk. I have about a 1 in 200 chance of dying from this. I have taken far greater risks with my personal safety for far less money than 1 in 200.

I know my individual health and economic risk.

---

Even if true, your industry has nothing to do with the original blanket statement I replied to.

This whole situation becomes a lot easier to manage if everyone had your ability to see into the future.

---

I bolded what you responded to and it was referencing my OWN situation. It is not a difficult calculation to see it will not hamper my industry short of government shutdowns. It has nothing to do with being able to see the future. I know my own business.

And Linus Pauling believed vitamin c could basically cure cancer.

Levitt won the nobel in chemistry. He is definitely a very smart person, but this isn't technically his field. This is like Lord Kelvin pronouncing that geologists were incorrect in estimating the age of the Earth despite being an authority in thermodynamics, not geology.

While yes, exponential (in this case logistic, but it starts as exponential) growth models do assume random spread and interaction and your day to day dealings are not random and mostly limited to your social circle, your social circle has random connections to others. The passing of infection amongst members of circles is random even if limited to the circle, but this means the passing between circles is random as well. The overall effect is random transmission between circles and random transmission overall.

What you're left with is like a fractal, where no matter what level of interaction you look at, personal, social, community, state, country, etc, you get the same behavioral patterns.

BenColderHere said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

This country is gonna be singing a different tune in about a week and a half

Wait and see

---

True. But probably not in the way you think.

---

We'll see

Seems like every post you make is a revelation of your numbers always preaching doom. Ok we get it. You are an expert of class of 2011 and know more than most of us. We get it. All you do is add to the panic and why normal folks can't even get toilet paper now.
So you spew all this out constantly and just what the heck is your goal? We all know by now what might be or could be or might not be or should be.
Damn near everyone I know is doing all they can to keep themselves and their families safe and trying to survive this and are well aware of the might be's and could be's.
I wonder what you would have constantly said if you were living in WWII?
Damn man we get it about how bad this might be but very little we can do about it that we are not already doing and we need collectively to not be reminded about it every minute of the day as we see our economy crash. What good is it going to do to keep discussing numbers and stats?
It's bad, it's going to be here a while. Give it a rest with the constant statistics. Most folks are sick of it and well aware of the threat.

Gunny456 said:

---

Seems like every post you make is a revelation of your numbers always preaching doom. Ok we get it. You are an expert of class of 2011 and know more than most of us. We get it. All you do is add to the panic and why normal folks can't even get toilet paper now.
So you spew all this out constantly and just what the heck is your goal? We all know by now what might be or could be or might not be or should be.
Damn near everyone I know is doing all they can to keep themselves and their families safe and trying to survive this and are well aware of the might be's and could be's.
I wonder what you would have constantly said if you were living in WWII?
Damn man we get it about how bad this might be but very little we can do about it that we are not already doing and we need collectively to not be reminded about it every minute of the day as we see our economy crash. What good is it going to do to keep discussing numbers and stats?
It's bad, it's going to be here a while. Give it a rest with the constant statistics. Most folks are sick of it and well aware of the threat.

---

He does the same thing on premium when talking about the football program. Always worst case scenario. That is his thing.

Gunny456 said:

---

Seems like every post you make is a revelation of your numbers always preaching doom. Ok we get it. You are an expert of class of 2011 and know more than most of us. We get it. All you do is add to the panic and why normal folks can't even get toilet paper now.
So you spew all this out constantly and just what the heck is your goal? We all know by now what might be or could be or might not be or should be.
Damn near everyone I know is doing all they can to keep themselves and their families safe and trying to survive this and are well aware of the might be's and could be's.
I wonder what you would have constantly said if you were living in WWII?
Damn man we get it about how bad this might be but very little we can do about it that we are not already doing and we need collectively to not be reminded about it every minute of the day as we see our economy crash. What good is it going to do to keep discussing numbers and stats?
It's bad, it's going to be here a while. Give it a rest with the constant statistics. Most folks are sick of it and well aware of the threat.

---

Big Chief Tablet updated - Gunny does not understand simple math.

Jet Black said:

---

Gunny456 said:

---

Seems like every post you make is a revelation of your numbers always preaching doom. Ok we get it. You are an expert of class of 2011 and know more than most of us. We get it. All you do is add to the panic and why normal folks can't even get toilet paper now.
So you spew all this out constantly and just what the heck is your goal? We all know by now what might be or could be or might not be or should be.
Damn near everyone I know is doing all they can to keep themselves and their families safe and trying to survive this and are well aware of the might be's and could be's.
I wonder what you would have constantly said if you were living in WWII?
Damn man we get it about how bad this might be but very little we can do about it that we are not already doing and we need collectively to not be reminded about it every minute of the day as we see our economy crash. What good is it going to do to keep discussing numbers and stats?
It's bad, it's going to be here a while. Give it a rest with the constant statistics. Most folks are sick of it and well aware of the threat.

---

He does the same thing on premium when talking about the football program. Always worst case scenario. That is his thing.

---

Lol.

I had forgotten about that

It's pretty simple to avoid people talking about stats if you want. It's not like he emailed them to you.

The_Fox said:

---

Hi, Im Brett said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

Hi, Im Brett said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

It was hypothetical. I said what if... I also never specified USA only.

You're getting off topic because you can't answer the question. You don't know the answer. You're just emotionally fueled because what's done is done. **** happens. We can do it different in the future, but we are committed to fighting this thing now. There will be major implications in the trillions of dollars yes, but there likely would have been if we didn't lock down businesses and ask people to stay home.

---

We will never know whether this is true.

---

We will never know if the economic impacts would have been worse in the long run had we not done what we are doing now. There. Want to keep playing what if's?

---

Nope. The only thing anyone can know with certainty is their own situation. That calculation is an easy one.

---

This is simply not true, and quite frankly, the crux of the issue. Some people are invincible until they're not.

I don't lean strongly one way or the other, but the middle is a lonely place these days.

---

What?? You do not think I can accurately predict my economic risk if we did nothing and let this virus burn through several million people. I absolutely can. It will have zero impact on my industry. Hell, everyone above 65 could die and it would have zero effect on my industry. It is entirely a young man's game.

As for personal risk. I have about a 1 in 200 chance of dying from this. I have taken far greater risks with my personal safety for far less money than 1 in 200.

I know my individual health and economic risk.

---

Even if true, your industry has nothing to do with the original blanket statement I replied to.

This whole situation becomes a lot easier to manage if everyone had your ability to see into the future.

---

I bolded what you responded to and it was referencing my OWN situation. It is not a difficult calculation to see it will not hamper my industry short of government shutdowns. It has nothing to do with being able to see the future. I know my own business.

---

Saying everyone over 65 could die and it would have no effect on you is ludicrous. Saying this could burn through millions of people and you would be unaffected is just as ludicrous. That could have disastrous effects on the overall economy that no one would be immune to. You're looking at huge spending decreases, insurance losses, lost productivity from people being sick, etc. If you don't think the landscape would drastically change or you'd be completely immune, I'd love to know how you came to that conclusion.

Proposition Joe said:

---

It would be really amusing to have everyone with a strong opinion about this to post what their degree is in (and where from) as well as their current occupation.

---

B.S. Biochemistry, M.S. in Molecular Virology...was a PhD candidate and took a terminal masters due to life issues. Now I am an attorney, both commercial and patent.

And evaluating the science directed news reports is not about bad data so much as figuring out what issues are being ignored/what questions weren't asked/does the writer know or care about the limits of their data.

If I recall correctly hes a criminal defense lawyer, so he's basically immune from any and all business cycles.

Proposition Joe said:

---

It would be really amusing to have everyone with a strong opinion about this to post what their degree is in (and where from) as well as their current occupation.

---

B.S. Telecom Engineering, Texas A&M, IT Management & Wildlife Data Analyst.
PhD Music and Adult Entertainment Piracy, HobbesNetU

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

Hi, Im Brett said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

Hi, Im Brett said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

It was hypothetical. I said what if... I also never specified USA only.

You're getting off topic because you can't answer the question. You don't know the answer. You're just emotionally fueled because what's done is done. **** happens. We can do it different in the future, but we are committed to fighting this thing now. There will be major implications in the trillions of dollars yes, but there likely would have been if we didn't lock down businesses and ask people to stay home.

---

We will never know whether this is true.

---

We will never know if the economic impacts would have been worse in the long run had we not done what we are doing now. There. Want to keep playing what if's?

---

Nope. The only thing anyone can know with certainty is their own situation. That calculation is an easy one.

---

This is simply not true, and quite frankly, the crux of the issue. Some people are invincible until they're not.

I don't lean strongly one way or the other, but the middle is a lonely place these days.

---

What?? You do not think I can accurately predict my economic risk if we did nothing and let this virus burn through several million people. I absolutely can. It will have zero impact on my industry. Hell, everyone above 65 could die and it would have zero effect on my industry. It is entirely a young man's game.

As for personal risk. I have about a 1 in 200 chance of dying from this. I have taken far greater risks with my personal safety for far less money than 1 in 200.

I know my individual health and economic risk.

---

Even if true, your industry has nothing to do with the original blanket statement I replied to.

This whole situation becomes a lot easier to manage if everyone had your ability to see into the future.

---

I bolded what you responded to and it was referencing my OWN situation. It is not a difficult calculation to see it will not hamper my industry short of government shutdowns. It has nothing to do with being able to see the future. I know my own business.

---

Saying everyone over 65 could die and it would have no effect on you is ludicrous. Saying this could burn through millions of people and you would be unaffected is just as ludicrous. That could have disastrous effects on the overall economy that no one would be immune to. You're looking at huge spending decreases, insurance losses, lost productivity from people being sick, etc. If you don't think the landscape would drastically change or you'd be completely immune, I'd love to know how you came to that conclusion.

---

Who commits crime? How many offenders are over 50?

When the economy gets bad, does crime go away?

When the economy is good, does crime stop?

The types of crime may change based on the current state of the economy, but unless the cops stop arresting people, the prosecutors stop prosecuting people, or the courts stop adjudicating people my business model is fine.

If the people cannot afford an attorney they will get one appointed per the Constitution. It may shift some business from retained to appointed clients but there will always be an abundance of clients.

The only real fear I really have is a court shutdown or an oversaturation of attorneys in my market. Most of the attorneys where I am are over 60.

We can't even test that fast, how will we ever know?

Quote:

---

And evaluating the science directed news reports is not about bad data so much as figuring out what issues are being ignored/what questions weren't asked/does the writer know or care about the limits of their data.

---

Very insightful comment.

That's why I think jumping straight to the referenced paper is nice because the papers always list assumptions and the good ones point out limitations and sources of error/bias.

https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

This data is updated periodically throughout the day. As of this post, we're at 62k cases in the United States. One week ago, we were at 13.7k. Two weeks ago, we were at 1.7k.

**** is getting real. This is why we're going ape**** trying to contain and slow down this spread.

P.C. Principal said:

---

https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

This data is updated periodically throughout the day. As of this post, we're at 62k cases in the United States. One week ago, we were at 13.7k. Two weeks ago, we were at 1.7k.

**** is getting real. This is why we're going ape**** trying to contain and slow down this spread.

---

Assume the fetal position, put thumb in mouth

Oh wait, you've been doing that for 2 weeks

Why the personal attack?

Death rate at 1.3% as per CDC data. 54k infected, 756 deaths as of yesterday.

The_Fox said:

---

Troutslime said:

---

Death rate at 1.3% as per CDC data. 54k infected, 756 deaths as of yesterday.

---

There is no way possible they have the correct total infected number to accurately calculate the death rate.

---

I agree that CDC should have an asterisk, I just made that post to more complete the picture the OP was painting.
Hospitalization is what I wish was reported.

So I guess we didn't get to 1MM confirmed cases worldwide as OP suggested?