3 ms·

Agreed, and it's worth noting that the death rate from economic damage could be significantly higher than the death rate from coronavirus. For each 1% increase

• macintux 7y ago
  Let’s say the unemployment jumps to 30%, which is conceivable, but awful. That would mean 200-300k people die from increased unemployment. Terrible. The new virus’s worst case is more along the lines of 2-3 million, and at that point we’re probably in health care meltdown which would make it much worse than even those staggering numbers. So yes, we don’t want to shut down the economy for 6 months, but it’s critical that we don’t swerve too far out of control. We can pay people to stay alive. We can’t wave a financial wand and solve the virus.
  • SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
    We can pay people to stay alive in the short term. In the long term, the economy is what allows the average American to live better than the average Ghanaian. 6 months of an essentials only economy - a subsistence economy, it's typically called - would do incredible and irreparable damage.
• gdubs 7y ago
  Is the source on this fact “The Big Short”? Because, it’s contested and not black and white. Mortality rates actually decreased during the Great Depression. Also, this isn’t a normal “unemployment” situation either — disaster relief isn’t out of the question.
  • 0xy 7y ago
    No, but I can't remember the source. Iirc if unemployed you have a >2.5x mortality rate of someone employed.