CNBC discussion panel mentioned it that day but it was not talked about much

[quote=brainbomb post_id=133194 time=1584293835 user_id=62]
On friday 1.5 trillion dollars was poured into the market to prevent collapse. There was no headlines about it. Am I crazy or is this a really bad decision to make before the virus peaks?
[/quote]

No headlines?

How did you find out about it then?

https://lawandcrime.com/covid-19-pandemic/trump-axed-congressionally-mandated-pandemic-recovery-oversight-with-stimulus-bill-signing-statement/

As soon as Trump signed the $2.2 trillion stimulus bill he said he wasn't going to have the oversight that was supposed to prevent him and his cronies from profiting from it. Back during the 2016 presidential debate, Trump said that they needed more laws to make him do the right moral things, but it seems even with the new law specifically addressing his profiting illegally at the country's expense, Trump isn't going to let it stop him. Trump wants to turn the new stimulus plan into another personal check book like his now closed charity.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/powerup/2020/03/23/powerup-trump-won-t-rule-out-possibility-his-private-business-could-benefit-from-coronavirus-stimulus/5e77caca88e0fa101a74f374/

Trump keeps dodging the question on whether his hotels and properties will get bailout money in violation of the constitution. He's only allowed his salary and can not receive any other money from the government while president.

The last Republican Senate plan would also have blocked any disclosure for 6 months on naming companies that would get money.

Thanks, nice article. Based on that estimate (500k dead by August) I can assume that is 500k deaths in 6 months, compared to the normal rate of 500k deaths per year.

Twice as fast? Does that mean the same 500k ppl die, just sooner? Or that a normal250k in 6 months die, and an extra 250k die who wouldn't have otherwise?

Here we go... Around half way down

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654

Indeed so. It reminds me of the old joke research paper:

Rabbi Hunting with Dogs - The Role of Typos in Antisemitism

Although managing to accidentally come up with a statement that blames both the Jewish and Irish Traveller communities is an excellent effort :p.

In the UK there are well over half a million deaths a year, predominantly from the same groups as those considered "at risk" from coronavirus. There was quite a good BBC article that talked about it, but it seems to have vanished from the home page... I'll see if I can track it down.

I take your point regarding the opportunity cost of not having ICUs available for more mundane emergencies. I imagine there will also be a an increase in suicides as isolation hits home. Far fewer road traffic accidents, though, and fewer deaths brought on by traffic pollution.

Apologies for the typo, n and j are very close together...

Octavious, ignoring your distrust of Chinese figures, what is the normal death rate for the UK?

Also, do you realise that when all the ICU beds are occupied, that means people who have a stroke/heart attack/car accident who would otherwise get an ICU bed and have a chance of surviving will now be triaged, and coronavirus patients with a 50% chance of surviving in ICU will almost always get the bed first. (though the older, maler, and more comorbidities they have, the more likely they will be given palliative care aswell), so in most worst case scenarios, they are only counting the Coronavirus deaths, not the extra deaths of other people who would have otherwise survived.

[quote=orathaic post_id=134997 time=1584749706 user_id=64]
Also note, China no longer has local infections (ie all jew cases are being brought in by travellers), so suppression methods employed work.
[/quote]

Again with the Jewish conspiracies, Ora? :razz:

In all honesty, considering the vast amount of disinformation spread by the Chinese government throughout this crisis, I will take these numbers with a pinch of salt.

An interesting thing to note about the Imperial College figures is that, whilst death estimates for flu are based on the number of expected deaths above background level, the number of expected deaths for coronavirus are not. In short, a lot of the people expected to die would have been expected to die anyway. I am not a fan of this double counting when quite so much is at stake

Other people also reporting on this ICL paper:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/615370/coronavirus-pandemic-social-distancing-18-months/

Also note, China no longer has local infections (ie all jew cases are being brought in by travellers), so suppression methods employed work.

That said, nowhere else has implemented such harsh methods. And most state apparatuses may not be able to effectively impose such measures. Likewise, easing restrictions now opens up China for massive reinfection. They need to lock down everything until an effective vaccine is available (estimates are still at 12-18 months).

Still Imperial College Covid-19 responce team recommended Suppression (not mitigation) for now.
[quote]
In addition, even if all patients were able to be treated, we
predict there would still be in the order of 250,000 deaths in GB, and 1.1-1.2 million in the US.

In the UK, this conclusion has only been reached in the last few days, with the refinement of estimates of likely ICU demand due to COVID-19 based on experience in Italy and the UK (previous planning estimates assumed half the demand now estimated) and with the NHS providing increasing certainty around the limits of hospital surge capacity.

We therefore conclude that epidemic suppression is the only viable strategy at the current time. The social and economic effects of the measures which are needed to achieve this policy goal will be profound.
[/quote]

Unless Australia is hiding an extra billion or two people in the Outback I reckon your starting figure for the global population is a little high. The death rate figures are also wildly inflated by the testing being disproportionately applied to those showing severe symptoms. There is no reliable figure, but it will likely be closer to 0.1%. We'll know more when reliable antibody testing starts being rolled out in the near future.

It's also worth keeping in mind that globally the population is far younger than that of the current virus hotspots, so the impact in the likes of Africa will likely be somewhat milder. And eventually we'll start getting effective treatments online, which will limit the impact over longer time scales.

I don't think we'll get anywhere near half a billion. Although you still have a higher figure for global population after the virus than I do :p

I used my daffy clockwork brain in a well lubricated with whisky condition and did it abstract, so I've just used pen and paper & relatively sober lubricated with tea clockwork brain & new result .. one hundred million dead from nine billion.
Sixty percent infection rate of nine billion is 5.4 billion
Two percent fatalities.. 108 million
Call me sceptical, but I think a 2% death rate globally is optimistic.
But I will revise my estimate to, as a crude rough guestimate.. to between one hundred million and four hundred million. So 2% to 8% of sixty percent of nine billion.
I'm confident that humanity's survival will continue despite coronavirus .. at that crude level, even if half a billion are killed, that still leaves 8.5 billion.

Chancellor Merkel said (10 March) that 60 to 70% of the German population would be infected.
Extrapolation of a putative Death Toll - go beyond 1918 "Spanish" flu figures to a plague average.
Thucydides had grim anecdotal plague reports (including Pericles' death from the plague).
Is Daniel Defoe the author of JOURNAL OF A PLAGUE YEAR?

It's all the same order of magnitude. I don't think trying to aim for a more precise figure with current levels of information is particularly useful.

[quote=Octavious post_id=133635 time=1584453224 user_id=71]
That is very crude maths, Major :p. Care to show your workings? I'll be surprised if it's much more than 1% of your figures
[/quote]

Which end of 3-8 million?

That is very crude maths, Major :p. Care to show your workings? I'll be surprised if it's much more than 1% of your figures

yikes

Lookout gang we've gone over the edge of the abyss, crossed the event horizon and we enter grim & challenging times.
My crude maths comes up with a death toll of between 300 million persons and 800 million from a global population of nine billion.
I predict that between now and Christmas in Trumptoad's USA more fatalities of persons under the age of fifty years will be gun related & not caused directly by Cironavirus but by fear, panic and chaos amongst a nation awash with firearms.

Proposed stimulus package to boost the US economy like in past recent cases:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/romney-suggests-one-time-1000-180412364.html