The SAS | EuroBonus Forum Kafé
Mar 28, 2020, 5:05 pm
#5686
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ARN
Posts: 3,471
The lockdown of Europe is already causing massive unemployment, hunger, malnutrition, depression, pensions are going down the drain, tax money is dwindling, violent crimes, etc.
I'll share with you a link to an article from SkyNews with a very disturbing video from Italy. In this video from the south of Italy, you can see desperate people in confrontations with the police; people raiding supermarkets to steal food; a father who's been quarantined with his daughter for 15-20 days and who has only a few scraps of bread left, and now he's threatening the government with a revolution; people who are willing to kill to get food; crime gangs that are inciting violcence. And this after only three weeks of restrictions. Some governments are talking about keeping restrictions in place for months in order to "flatten the curve." I read one Norwegian health official who believed that some restrictions would be in place for 18 months.
Granted, this video is from the south of Italy, which is a relatively poor region, with a Mediterranean temper. Scandinavia is relatively speaking more affluent, and we have a cooler temper. So, it will take more than three weeks for the same situation to arise in Scandinavia. My estimate is that it will take about three months to reach the same situation as three weeks in southern Italy.
I believe that unless the restrictions in Italy are lifted soon, we will see blood flowing in the streets with people fighting for food, and the police trying to stop them, and with both protestors and police fighting each other.
Here's the link. When watching this video, try to have some compassion with people whose lives are ruined because of the lockdown:
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...ewing-11965122
Have in mind that Italy saw 650,000 dead people in 2019, and never locked down because of it. So far, 9,100 people have died from covid-19. And, yes, most of those people had several serious life-threatening sicknesses even before covid-19 came along.
You don't cure the sickness by killing the patient.
Mar 28, 2020, 6:24 pm
#5687
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,169
I get the impression that you don't understand the seriousness of the conseqences of the virtual lockdown of the entire continent of Europe. The restrictions that are designed to fight covid-19 will likely cause far more dead people -- or "collateral damage," as you choose to call it -- than the virus itself. And I'm not the only one with that opinion.
The lockdown of Europe is already causing massive unemployment, hunger, malnutrition, depression, pensions are going down the drain, tax money is dwindling, violent crimes, etc.
I'll share with you a link to an article from SkyNews with a very disturbing video from Italy. In this video from the south of Italy, you can see desperate people in confrontations with the police; people raiding supermarkets to steal food; a father who's been quarantined with his daughter for 15-20 days and who has only a few scraps of bread left, and now he's threatening the government with a revolution; people who are willing to kill to get food; crime gangs that are inciting violcence. And this after only three weeks of restrictions. Some governments are talking about keeping restrictions in place for months in order to "flatten the curve." I read one Norwegian health official who believed that some restrictions would be in place for 18 months.
Granted, this video is from the south of Italy, which is a relatively poor region, with a Mediterranean temper. Scandinavia is relatively speaking more affluent, and we have a cooler temper. So, it will take more than three weeks for the same situation to arise in Scandinavia. My estimate is that it will take about three months to reach the same situation as three weeks in southern Italy.
I believe that unless the restrictions in Italy are lifted soon, we will see blood flowing in the streets with people fighting for food, and the police trying to stop them, and with both protestors and police fighting each other.
Here's the link. When watching this video, try to have some compassion with people whose lives are ruined because of the lockdown:
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...ewing-11965122
Have in mind that Italy saw 650,000 dead people in 2019, and never locked down because of it. So far, 9,100 people have died from covid-19. And, yes, most of those people had several serious life-threatening sicknesses even before covid-19 came along.
You don't cure the sickness by killing the patient.
The lockdown of Europe is already causing massive unemployment, hunger, malnutrition, depression, pensions are going down the drain, tax money is dwindling, violent crimes, etc.
I'll share with you a link to an article from SkyNews with a very disturbing video from Italy. In this video from the south of Italy, you can see desperate people in confrontations with the police; people raiding supermarkets to steal food; a father who's been quarantined with his daughter for 15-20 days and who has only a few scraps of bread left, and now he's threatening the government with a revolution; people who are willing to kill to get food; crime gangs that are inciting violcence. And this after only three weeks of restrictions. Some governments are talking about keeping restrictions in place for months in order to "flatten the curve." I read one Norwegian health official who believed that some restrictions would be in place for 18 months.
Granted, this video is from the south of Italy, which is a relatively poor region, with a Mediterranean temper. Scandinavia is relatively speaking more affluent, and we have a cooler temper. So, it will take more than three weeks for the same situation to arise in Scandinavia. My estimate is that it will take about three months to reach the same situation as three weeks in southern Italy.
I believe that unless the restrictions in Italy are lifted soon, we will see blood flowing in the streets with people fighting for food, and the police trying to stop them, and with both protestors and police fighting each other.
Here's the link. When watching this video, try to have some compassion with people whose lives are ruined because of the lockdown:
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...ewing-11965122
Have in mind that Italy saw 650,000 dead people in 2019, and never locked down because of it. So far, 9,100 people have died from covid-19. And, yes, most of those people had several serious life-threatening sicknesses even before covid-19 came along.
You don't cure the sickness by killing the patient.
Yes 650,000 dies every year, at the moment Covid-19 has killed more than 10,000 in less than a month. The average age of the people passing away in Italy from covid-19 or associated causes is indeed 78, so there is going to be a big overlap with the dieing of natural causes group. But who is to say that a 78 year old person could not have another 10 to 15 good years with the family if the system protects them. Many heart transplants don't have a much longer outlook than that.
Italy had 3,325 traffic fatalities in 2018, that is nothing compared to 650,000 so why keep investing in road safety, car safety, technologies to reduce that? Is all of Volvo's investment in car safety just a waste, as in the bigger picture, not many people died anyway.
Should the 737MAX just keep flying? What's 346 lives compared to the overall number of deaths in Indonesia and Ethiopia in one year.
I get your point, the shut down is not without risk and consequences, but in Europe starvation should really not be part of these hardships. There is no reason people should be starving in Italy. However that they do is bad public management and bad human behaviour. Let's focus on that, and make sure that we don't fail people on these points as well.
Mar 28, 2020, 11:38 pm
#5688
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 439
It's unfortunately a few years since last time I went skiing. On second thought, maybe now is a good time to start skiing again. I've missed it ... 
Seriously, I have a feeling that right now, it's too late to stop the spread no matter what you do. Let's just do some simple maths.
All experts agree that the number of infected people is seriously wrong because most countries haven't conducted mass testing of the population. So there is no way of knowing exactly how many have really been infected with SARS-CoV-2. But we do know how many have died, and as far as I've understood, most patients that die were infected about 4 weeks prior to the time of death.
We don't know the death rate of the virus, but most experts that I've read are guessing that when the dust settles, the death rate will be somewhere between 0.5-1%. If we assume that the death rate is 0.8%, we can actually calculate how many were infected in each country four weeks ago. Using the WHO situation dashboard figures, that would mean that on February 29, the following number of people were infected:
Italy 1,020,625
Spain 511,125
USA 123,875
Sweden 8,250
Denmark 5,125
Norway 1,750
This is, of course, an extremely crude calculation. But if we for a moment accept that we're close to the real number here, it would mean that the restrictions came way too late to stop the spread in most European countries.
Four weeks ago, Italy had 29 deaths, thus 3,625 infected eight weeks ago on February 1. During the four weeks from February 1 to February 28, the number of infected was multiplied by 282. If we assume the same infection rate for all the aforementioned countries, we are today in a situation with the following number of people infected:
Italy 287,816,250
Spain 144,137,250
USA 34,932,750
Sweden 2,326,500
Denmark 1,445,250
Norway 493,500
Naturally, this is not a scientific way of calculating the numbers, but my uneducated and unscientific guess is that the virus has already spread so much that today's restrictions will mean nothing at all in containing the virus. It's already too late.
Seriously, I have a feeling that right now, it's too late to stop the spread no matter what you do. Let's just do some simple maths.
All experts agree that the number of infected people is seriously wrong because most countries haven't conducted mass testing of the population. So there is no way of knowing exactly how many have really been infected with SARS-CoV-2. But we do know how many have died, and as far as I've understood, most patients that die were infected about 4 weeks prior to the time of death.
We don't know the death rate of the virus, but most experts that I've read are guessing that when the dust settles, the death rate will be somewhere between 0.5-1%. If we assume that the death rate is 0.8%, we can actually calculate how many were infected in each country four weeks ago. Using the WHO situation dashboard figures, that would mean that on February 29, the following number of people were infected:
Italy 1,020,625
Spain 511,125
USA 123,875
Sweden 8,250
Denmark 5,125
Norway 1,750
This is, of course, an extremely crude calculation. But if we for a moment accept that we're close to the real number here, it would mean that the restrictions came way too late to stop the spread in most European countries.
Four weeks ago, Italy had 29 deaths, thus 3,625 infected eight weeks ago on February 1. During the four weeks from February 1 to February 28, the number of infected was multiplied by 282. If we assume the same infection rate for all the aforementioned countries, we are today in a situation with the following number of people infected:
Italy 287,816,250
Spain 144,137,250
USA 34,932,750
Sweden 2,326,500
Denmark 1,445,250
Norway 493,500
Naturally, this is not a scientific way of calculating the numbers, but my uneducated and unscientific guess is that the virus has already spread so much that today's restrictions will mean nothing at all in containing the virus. It's already too late.
Mar 29, 2020, 1:29 am
#5689
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ARN
Posts: 3,471
In the end we all die one way or another, so why not just abolish any healthcare, as it can only postpone the inevitable? Spending money to delay what will happens anyway is a terrible waste. Putting your argument to the extreme.
I get your point, the shut down is not without risk and consequences, but in Europe starvation should really not be part of these hardships. There is no reason people should be starving in Italy. However that they do is bad public management and bad human behaviour. Let's focus on that, and make sure that we don't fail people on these points as well.
I get your point, the shut down is not without risk and consequences, but in Europe starvation should really not be part of these hardships. There is no reason people should be starving in Italy. However that they do is bad public management and bad human behaviour. Let's focus on that, and make sure that we don't fail people on these points as well.
So far this year, 14 million people have died of various diseases all around the world. For 26,654 of these (0.2%), covid-19 has played a role in their deaths. No politician in world history has ever instituted restrictions that have ruined the entire economy of any single country due to a single disease, or even for the combined diseases which have caused the deaths of the 99.8%. Why should we suddenly do that for this disease?
The problem is that all politicians and "experts" have tunnel vision and are focusing on one single problem -- how to stop covid-19. It's an extremely short sighted view. They need to have a broader view of society and make decisions that will benefit the country on all fronts in the long run. In the long run, this fight against covid-19 will ruin the health care system. When the economy is ruined, the health care system is also ruined.
Mar 29, 2020, 1:37 am
#5690
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ARN
Posts: 3,471
When reading the news about people dying from covid-19, it's important to realize that it takes about four weeks from the time of infection until the time of death. So, all deaths that occur today are due to infections that occurred before any restrictions were introduced. Also, even after you've reached flock immunity, the number of deaths will continue to be high for another four weeks. The number of deaths will not taper off until four weeks after having reached flock immunity.
Mar 29, 2020, 2:01 am
#5691
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Stockholm
Programs: Various
Posts: 3,369
The only way it can happen is if people are actually encouraged to spread the virus. The excess dead are just old people anyway.
Mar 29, 2020, 2:17 am
#5692
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,169
No, that is not an extreme version of my argument. That is a misrepresentation of my argument. Normally, health care does not ruin the entire economy of the whole continent. This time, it does.
So far this year, 14 million people have died of various diseases all around the world. For 26,654 of these (0.2%), covid-19 has played a role in their deaths. No politician in world history has ever instituted restrictions that have ruined the entire economy of any single country due to a single disease, or even for the combined diseases which have caused the deaths of the 99.8%. Why should we suddenly do that for this disease?
The problem is that all politicians and "experts" have tunnel vision and are focusing on one single problem -- how to stop covid-19. It's an extremely short sighted view. They need to have a broader view of society and make decisions that will benefit the country on all fronts in the long run. In the long run, this fight against covid-19 will ruin the health care system. When the economy is ruined, the health care system is also ruined.
So far this year, 14 million people have died of various diseases all around the world. For 26,654 of these (0.2%), covid-19 has played a role in their deaths. No politician in world history has ever instituted restrictions that have ruined the entire economy of any single country due to a single disease, or even for the combined diseases which have caused the deaths of the 99.8%. Why should we suddenly do that for this disease?
The problem is that all politicians and "experts" have tunnel vision and are focusing on one single problem -- how to stop covid-19. It's an extremely short sighted view. They need to have a broader view of society and make decisions that will benefit the country on all fronts in the long run. In the long run, this fight against covid-19 will ruin the health care system. When the economy is ruined, the health care system is also ruined.
Mar 29, 2020, 2:47 am
#5693
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ARN
Posts: 3,471
Further up in this thread a shared a link to an Oxford University study which claims that perhaps up to 50% of the U.K. population have already been infected with the virus. The truth is that nobody knows today how many have been infected because nobody has tested the entire population.
Mar 29, 2020, 3:02 am
#5694
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ARN
Posts: 3,471
For anybody really interested in this, I would recommend an article that I just read written by British professor of pathology Dr. John Lee. He makes many of the same points that I've made earlier in this thread (maybe he's been reading my posts 
), but argues in a more scientific way. "How deadly is the coronavirus? It's still far from clear":
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...GOc0m2Cn_cG0A0
Some of his most notable points:
), but argues in a more scientific way. "How deadly is the coronavirus? It's still far from clear":https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...GOc0m2Cn_cG0A0
Some of his most notable points:
Statistically, we would expect about 51,000 to die in Britain this month. At the time of writing, 422 deaths are linked to Covid-19 — so 0.8 per cent of that expected total. On a global basis, we’d expect 14 million to die over the first three months of the year. The world’s 18,944 coronavirus deaths represent 0.14 per cent of that total. These figures might shoot up but they are, right now, lower than other infectious diseases that we live with (such as flu). Not figures that would, in and of themselves, cause drastic global reactions.
If he’s right, the headline death rate due to this virus is likely to be ten to 20 times lower, say 0.25 per cent to 0.5 per cent. That puts the Covid-19 mortality rate in the range associated with infections like flu.
If someone dies of a respiratory infection in the UK, the specific cause of the infection is not usually recorded, unless the illness is a rare ‘notifiable disease’. So the vast majority of respiratory deaths in the UK are recorded as bronchopneumonia, pneumonia, old age or a similar designation. We don’t really test for flu, or other seasonal infections. If the patient has, say, cancer, motor neurone disease or another serious disease, this will be recorded as the cause of death, even if the final illness was a respiratory infection. This means UK certifications normally under-record deaths due to respiratory infections.Now look at what has happened since the emergence of Covid-19 ... if any of these patients dies, staff will have to record the Covid-19 designation on the death certificate — contrary to usual practice for most infections of this kind. There is a big difference between Covid-19 causing death, and Covid-19 being found in someone who died of other causes. Making Covid-19 notifiable might give the appearance of it causing increasing numbers of deaths, whether this is true or not. It might appear far more of a killer than flu, simply because of the way deaths are recorded.
One pretty clear indicator is death. If a new infection is causing many extra people to die (as opposed to an infection present in people who would have died anyway) then it will cause an increase in the overall death rate. But we have yet to see any statistical evidence for excess deaths, in any part of the world.
How do we measure the health consequences of taking people’s lives, jobs, leisure and purpose away from them to protect them from an anticipated threat? Which causes least harm? The moral debate is not lives vs money. It is lives vs lives. It will take months, perhaps years, if ever, before we can assess the wider implications of what we are doing. The damage to children’s education, the excess suicides, the increase in mental health problems, the taking away of resources from other health problems that we were dealing with effectively. Those who need medical help now but won’t seek it, or might not be offered it.
But governments must remember that rushed science is almost always bad science. We have decided on policies of extraordinary magnitude without concrete evidence of excess harm already occurring, and without proper scrutiny of the science used to justify them.
If he’s right, the headline death rate due to this virus is likely to be ten to 20 times lower, say 0.25 per cent to 0.5 per cent. That puts the Covid-19 mortality rate in the range associated with infections like flu.
If someone dies of a respiratory infection in the UK, the specific cause of the infection is not usually recorded, unless the illness is a rare ‘notifiable disease’. So the vast majority of respiratory deaths in the UK are recorded as bronchopneumonia, pneumonia, old age or a similar designation. We don’t really test for flu, or other seasonal infections. If the patient has, say, cancer, motor neurone disease or another serious disease, this will be recorded as the cause of death, even if the final illness was a respiratory infection. This means UK certifications normally under-record deaths due to respiratory infections.Now look at what has happened since the emergence of Covid-19 ... if any of these patients dies, staff will have to record the Covid-19 designation on the death certificate — contrary to usual practice for most infections of this kind. There is a big difference between Covid-19 causing death, and Covid-19 being found in someone who died of other causes. Making Covid-19 notifiable might give the appearance of it causing increasing numbers of deaths, whether this is true or not. It might appear far more of a killer than flu, simply because of the way deaths are recorded.
One pretty clear indicator is death. If a new infection is causing many extra people to die (as opposed to an infection present in people who would have died anyway) then it will cause an increase in the overall death rate. But we have yet to see any statistical evidence for excess deaths, in any part of the world.
How do we measure the health consequences of taking people’s lives, jobs, leisure and purpose away from them to protect them from an anticipated threat? Which causes least harm? The moral debate is not lives vs money. It is lives vs lives. It will take months, perhaps years, if ever, before we can assess the wider implications of what we are doing. The damage to children’s education, the excess suicides, the increase in mental health problems, the taking away of resources from other health problems that we were dealing with effectively. Those who need medical help now but won’t seek it, or might not be offered it.
But governments must remember that rushed science is almost always bad science. We have decided on policies of extraordinary magnitude without concrete evidence of excess harm already occurring, and without proper scrutiny of the science used to justify them.
Mar 29, 2020, 3:46 am
#5695
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ARN
Posts: 3,471
But you are missing one part about the 14 million, out of how many in total having these diseases? Italy is running over 10% fatalities, Spain is running 8.2% fatalities. Where as countries that manage to keep the situation under control are running 1 to 2 percent. The speed of the spread, and the potential fatality rate if left unchecked makes this very different from most of the diseases that caused those 14 million deaths.
In short, no, Italy isn't running over 10% fatalities. There are two problems with this number: 1) Everybody hasn't been tested. There are lots of people that have contracted the disease but are asymptomatic. 2) The way deaths are recorded. If somebody dies with cancer and the flu, the death is recorded as cancer. If somebody dies with cancer and covid-19, the death is recorded as covid-19. There's a difference between covid-19 causing the death and being present in somebody who dies.
Mar 29, 2020, 4:58 am
#5696
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,169
Please read Dr. John Lee's article that I linked to in the previous reply to see why the numbers you are quoting may be completely wrong.
In short, no, Italy isn't running over 10% fatalities. There are two problems with this number: 1) Everybody hasn't been tested. There are lots of people that have contracted the disease but are asymptomatic. 2) The way deaths are recorded. If somebody dies with cancer and the flu, the death is recorded as cancer. If somebody dies with cancer and covid-19, the death is recorded as covid-19. There's a difference between covid-19 causing the death and being present in somebody who dies.
In short, no, Italy isn't running over 10% fatalities. There are two problems with this number: 1) Everybody hasn't been tested. There are lots of people that have contracted the disease but are asymptomatic. 2) The way deaths are recorded. If somebody dies with cancer and the flu, the death is recorded as cancer. If somebody dies with cancer and covid-19, the death is recorded as covid-19. There's a difference between covid-19 causing the death and being present in somebody who dies.
Some of his points are true, and some of his points are falling in to the flow of "There's white lies, there's lies, and then there is statistics"
He is looking at 14 million deaths in the world in 3 months. Those are everyone, even suicides. Now in order to take a disease seriously, he wants enough people to die in order to be statistically significant against that number? Maybe he should whittle that number down to people who die of Infectious diseases, and see if Covid-19 has a significant impact on that.
He also skirts very lightly over Korea that has the widest testing regime, but also due to the clusters around the relegious group, a high infection rate among young people, with a fatality rate on 1.6% at the moment. Korea has made a massive testing effort. Conducting 400,000 plus tests to find 9500 cases. They are probably they best statistical base at the moment. They would indicate that the 50% of the population number is taken out of the blue. But also with a majority young people infection, the fatality rate is still 10 times or more than the seasonal flu.
The variances between Germany, Spain, and Italy fatality rates is not as mysterious as he would like to pretend. It is more about where the infection is evolving. And the fact that Italy has spiked way above the capacity of the healthcare system.
The interesting part is also that he is a pathologist, his job is to give us statistics on the fatalities of many things, including Covid-19, but he is trying to do that before he even as a reasonable statistical base to do this on. While he has interesting points, and he really does, I'd also look quite a bit in the direction of a professor in infectious diseases to discuss how we prevent people from reaching a stage where they are within the field of Professor Lee.
Part of where he is right is on the media reaction. The media has been a big driver of fear and uncertainty, add to that social media. The media made a big thing out of the SARS, and the H1N1 back in their day. The main difference was that SARS did not make it to Europe and the US, and H1N1 did not make for the dramatic pictures as people by and large could just be sent home and wait it out. No healthcare system was overwhelmed. Look at the media stories about the latest major ebola outbreak, we were spoon-fed unpleasant pictures daily, but when the first cases made their way to the US and Europe the media went over the top as well.
Mar 29, 2020, 5:19 am
#5697
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
The notion that very few children get infected and spread the virus is wishful thinking.
Human children are not bats with super immune systems, and kids aren’t free of all relevant receptors until they hit some magic age of adulthood. There is zero credible evidence that all children are naturally immune to this virus from the get go and that children can’t spread the virus (whether or not they are asymptomatic or symptomatic or their symptoms are just unnoticed more).
Human children are not bats with super immune systems, and kids aren’t free of all relevant receptors until they hit some magic age of adulthood. There is zero credible evidence that all children are naturally immune to this virus from the get go and that children can’t spread the virus (whether or not they are asymptomatic or symptomatic or their symptoms are just unnoticed more).
Last edited by GUWonder; Mar 29, 2020 at 5:24 am
Mar 29, 2020, 5:26 am
#5698
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ARN
Posts: 3,471
Part of where he is right is on the media reaction. The media has been a big driver of fear and uncertainty, add to that social media. The media made a big thing out of the SARS, and the H1N1 back in their day. The main difference was that SARS did not make it to Europe and the US, and H1N1 did not make for the dramatic pictures as people by and large could just be sent home and wait it out. No healthcare system was overwhelmed. Look at the media stories about the latest major ebola outbreak, we were spoon-fed unpleasant pictures daily, but when the first cases made their way to the US and Europe the media went over the top as well.
Mar 29, 2020, 5:44 am
#5699
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: KSU (Kristiansund N, Norway)
Programs: SAS EBD/ *G
Posts: 2,163
Look again. In Norway, unemployment soared from around 3% to around 10% in two weeks of restrictions. In Italy, there is hunger, malnutrition, and violent crimes after three weeks of restrictions. The lockdown hits the poorest and weakest first. https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/va...att-handla-mat
Certainly: the crisis probably means that some of these workers will not get their jobs back, but for many this is a temporary state of affairs. Thus the unemployment statistics gives a correct picture of the employment rate at the moment, but doesn't really say much about the state of Norway's economy in the future.
Last edited by ksu; Mar 29, 2020 at 6:27 am
Mar 29, 2020, 7:54 am
#5700
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
This situation could end up slashing 5-10% off of 2020-2021 GDP. That’s a lot of money on the table to be lost, and there is also the asset depreciation losses. This is a huge loss of money and has very real consequences on the long-term health and well-being of people and societies. But since people panic rather easily and government then goes into overdrive — just look how countries react to non-state actor terrorist attacks — there is also a very real cost that hits when the “attacks” keep coming and the panic doesn’t go away because of one loss after another. If a given sort of losses like in Italy keep taking place repeatedly within a few months, regardless of the cause, things grind to a halt anyway. People generally don’t operate well in the aggregate when they feel highly insecure and traumatic experiences are in their face. If you're afraid that going out shopping can kill you or your loved ones, you’re going to try minimize going shopping. Human nature and economic activity are related to each other.
He didn’t invent yellow journalism, but he had a paper in NY in competition with a Hearst NY paper. To try to grow and keep an audience and grab the audience from the other side, sensationalist stories were sold by both sides and got increasingly sensationalist because such stories were more eagerly bought by the audience.
Not much has changed with the public all these years and it shows with how Facebook, other social media and sites online operate with and without algorithms designed to hook an audience.
But no amount of sensationalism to hook an audience for the purpose of padding the bank accounts is going to change how this virus has spread and is damaging and even destroying lives as it does so. Some may say that this is a time where sensationalism may even end up saving more lives than the Swedish experiment that has Sweden going its own way ..... for now.
I am hoping this herd immunity approach works in Sweden, because its failure is going to end up giving me a whole lot of things I don’t want for anyone.
This is something that I agree about completely. Traditionally, the media has made a lot of money on alarmist reports that spread fear. It's been like that since the day that Joseph Pulitzer invented yellow journalism in the 19th century, and Pulitzer is the big hero of all modern journalists.
Not much has changed with the public all these years and it shows with how Facebook, other social media and sites online operate with and without algorithms designed to hook an audience.
But no amount of sensationalism to hook an audience for the purpose of padding the bank accounts is going to change how this virus has spread and is damaging and even destroying lives as it does so. Some may say that this is a time where sensationalism may even end up saving more lives than the Swedish experiment that has Sweden going its own way ..... for now.
I am hoping this herd immunity approach works in Sweden, because its failure is going to end up giving me a whole lot of things I don’t want for anyone.
Last edited by GUWonder; Mar 29, 2020 at 8:08 am