How will you know what part of 2 million who will die in an economic depression will be productive or not? Any idea?
I bet you do not have a living parent or grandparents. If you do, why don’t you go and tell them that you value their life less than keeping your current consumption levels intact? lol
nope i have 2 parents early 60s, and both have a history of a combination of heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and a weakened immune system.
i facetimed them just now. the key is to keep away from them and to social distance. anyways i dont think personal issues should drive public policy.
So you are OK your parents’ death or let’s just say “increase their risk” to die just because you want to keep your current consumption levels?
You still have not addressed the “productive” people who will die.
First, you are aware that people under 65 above 50 are still in the workforce and they are mostly the management level people. Are you OK increasing their risk of death also?
What about the people under 50 who will die? I got the impression that you think people under 50 don’t die or something. Yes, they do. Although they die at the rate of the flu deaths currently (actually 40-49 dies 0.4% which is four times the flu and 30-39 dies 0.2% which is two times the flu), that is because they get treatment for Corona.
What will happen when those people do not get the treatment for Corona? Do you think their death rate will stay the same?
In a society of 100 million infected (which is again conservative in a non-restricted daily life) do you challenge that there will be millions of people under 50 who will get seriously sick?
By the way, I do not even mention that people who get seriously sick may have permanent lung damage even if they do not die.
I guess you are OK to have permanent lung damage yourself just because you want to purchase a pair new fancy shoes, or Rolex or something that is not necessary for your survival.
I just read the death report of a perfectly healthy 33 year old woman who died from Corona in Turkey three days ago.
So!!!
not about consumption levels. this is about remaining employed and productive. if corporations die. a lot of people they employ will go hungry. there are many cascading effects. anarchy is far scarier than a cough. we are already spending an expected 2 trillion minimum in stimulus comapred wit ha 4 trillion budget. we already have a trillion deficit once we take into account our revenues. 20 trillion in debt. wit ha 20 trillion gdp that is set to shrink 10% to 20% and unemployment expected t orise from 3.5 to 6.5-10%. those are merely expectations and from what i read, the impact is usually far worse than the expectations.
in terms of for myself.if the mortality rate for me was over 3%, id panic. otherwise, id leave my fate to chance. i dont think my lungs are at serious risk so i do not care if i get covid 19. in fact, id rather just get it over with and get it, self contain, and not worry about infecting others.
if you have a high mortality rate. self contain. avoid your family and friends. there is no point in self containing people who can easily survive this. we are talking at a 99.8% chance of survival. thats as good as a condom.
you shoul dalso remmeber than influenza is also at a low mortality rate becasue there are vaccines and treatment as well.
lastly remember this isnt the spanish flu that killed 50m with a mortality rate of 15% for all ages. this isnt even close to the bubonic plague that killed 250m with a mortality rate of 50% for all ages. for covid, everyone has a different death rate. and the ones that have a future have a high chance of surviving or a 0.2% chance of dying. they dont need hospitals. they need to stay in their house.
also i dont think many people under 50 will get seriously sick. but i think many of them will prolly think they are. and that will prolly cause more needless death in the older group. everyone is panicking when there really is no need.
Anyway, I will stop arguing with you.
You say nothing related to my original post but just BS, as if I am saying that we should not do anything to prevent the economic downturn.
By the way from today’s WSJ.
“At the same time, a widely cited study by Imperial College London warns the U.S. faces 2.2. million deaths from the virus if it does nothing to stop its spread.”
Let’s say that 90% of those deaths are people older than 50. That means 220K (10%) people you call “productive” will die, not to mention the permanent lung damage the rest will experience.
I am curious. Did you pass any of the CFA tests, yet?
charterholder for a good minute already. but i am sure you are too young to be 1 as you are too idealistic. its rather cute.
Hahahah.
Who cares what you think dude?
WE don’t shape public policy based on what you think or believe. Do you have evidence for what you think or not? You do not . You just believe.
By the way 40% who got seriously ill in the US until a week ago was younger than 50 years old. I do not know if that has changed since.
Oh, boy, how moron are you?
That 0.2% is based on they get the necessary treatment.
What are you going to do when millions of people cannot get treated? Do you really think that their death rate will stay 0.2% even though they do not get connected to a ventilator even though they have to in order to survive.
Seriously, how dumb are you?
I am totally surprised since you are incapable of analyzing basic numbers of a situation.
Well, I passed all three in 1.5 years 14 years ago.
Lol. I am 46. But I guess valuing human life more than consumption has become to be seen as idealistic in the society according to you. 