4 ms·

If many people get very sick simultaneously, they would not only overwhelm hospitals, they would also inflict a disorderly, involuntary shutdown of large swaths

by cs702 7y ago

If many people get very sick simultaneously, they would not only overwhelm hospitals, they would also inflict a disorderly, involuntary shutdown of large swaths of the economy, driven by fear -- instead of the orderly, voluntary shutdown we have at present, driven by government mandate. We all want to avoid that.

rootusrootus 7y ago
On the flip side, NYC just showed us they can suffer through 20% of the population becoming infected at about the same time without their hospitals utterly collapsing. There is probably some happy medium somewhere. For certain, flattening the curve so much that there are just a few new infections every week is not how we end the lock down.
- mrfusion 7y ago
  It’s up to 25% with the latest study. https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/cuomo-outlines-reopening-roadmap-for-new-york-as-daily-deaths-hit-lowest-level-in-weeks/2390949/ https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/cuomo-outlines-reopeni...
- gdilla 7y ago
  And? That was the point. It's better than 40% of the population becoming infected at the same time AND the hospitals totally collapsing.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - rootusrootus 7y ago
    I'm sorry you misunderstood. ~20% was my upper bound, ~0 the lower bound, and my opinion that we should find a middle ground.
    - throwaway1777 7y ago
      20 isn't actually the upper bound though
maxerickson 7y ago
There seem to be lots of people that think actual chaos is the only sufficient justification for a shutdown. No averting anything, let it get bad and mop up afterwords.
- paxys 7y ago
  There's always that chunk of the population who will grumble about taking precautions and then go "see, nothing happened!"
- greedo 7y ago
  It's the same crowd decrying property taxes with "I don't have any kids, why should I pay for schools?"
holler 7y ago
It's only orderly so far because of a) food supply has not been affected yet*, and b) the gov issued unprecedented bailouts and put money in the hands of many people/businesses. However, we can't just keep printing money forever, if this goes on another 6 months it could be a whole different ball game.
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
  The US actually can keep printing money for a long, long time, and they've been doing this for quite a while too: https://jeremiahjosey.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/money-supply.png https://jeremiahjosey.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/money-supp... Of course inflation will eventually eat away at its value, but at the moment we have the opposite problem, namely a deflationary spiral, because people aren't buying.
  - sjg007 7y ago
    Yeah nobody understands that we can print money. It’s the easiest solution and every other country is doing it already.
    - nostromo 7y ago
      Hope you’re saving now for your $10m one bedroom condo and your child’s $5m state university education.
      - aaronblohowiak 7y ago
        No inflation arises from injecting more money in the system if the amount injected is offsetting a reduction in economic activity. As activity increases, you take money out of the system (Raise rates)
      - imtringued 7y ago
        nostromo's comment may sound like a joke but the reason why those two things in particular are inflated is the fact that the printed money is only available as a mortgage or student loan. Nobody is buying consumer goods with the printed money and therefore we don't get to see inflation (which by definition only looks at consumer spending). We might get to see "real" inflation if that printed money is used to pay for unemployment benefits or to pay salaries.

by cs702 7y ago

rootusrootus 7y ago

On the flip side, NYC just showed us they can suffer through 20% of the population becoming infected at about the same time without their hospitals utterly collapsing. There is probably some happy medium somewhere. For certain, flattening the curve so much that there are just a few new infections every week is not how we end the lock down.

mrfusion 7y ago
It’s up to 25% with the latest study. https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/cuomo-outlines-reopening-roadmap-for-new-york-as-daily-deaths-hit-lowest-level-in-weeks/2390949/ https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/cuomo-outlines-reopeni...
gdilla 7y ago
And? That was the point. It's better than 40% of the population becoming infected at the same time AND the hospitals totally collapsing.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- rootusrootus 7y ago
  I'm sorry you misunderstood. ~20% was my upper bound, ~0 the lower bound, and my opinion that we should find a middle ground.
  - throwaway1777 7y ago
    20 isn't actually the upper bound though

maxerickson 7y ago

There seem to be lots of people that think actual chaos is the only sufficient justification for a shutdown. No averting anything, let it get bad and mop up afterwords.

paxys 7y ago
There's always that chunk of the population who will grumble about taking precautions and then go "see, nothing happened!"
greedo 7y ago
It's the same crowd decrying property taxes with "I don't have any kids, why should I pay for schools?"

holler 7y ago

It's only orderly so far because of a) food supply has not been affected yet*, and b) the gov issued unprecedented bailouts and put money in the hands of many people/businesses. However, we can't just keep printing money forever, if this goes on another 6 months it could be a whole different ball game.

9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
The US actually can keep printing money for a long, long time, and they've been doing this for quite a while too: https://jeremiahjosey.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/money-supply.png https://jeremiahjosey.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/money-supp... Of course inflation will eventually eat away at its value, but at the moment we have the opposite problem, namely a deflationary spiral, because people aren't buying.
- sjg007 7y ago
  Yeah nobody understands that we can print money. It’s the easiest solution and every other country is doing it already.
  - nostromo 7y ago
    Hope you’re saving now for your $10m one bedroom condo and your child’s $5m state university education.
    - aaronblohowiak 7y ago
      No inflation arises from injecting more money in the system if the amount injected is offsetting a reduction in economic activity. As activity increases, you take money out of the system (Raise rates)
    - imtringued 7y ago
      nostromo's comment may sound like a joke but the reason why those two things in particular are inflated is the fact that the printed money is only available as a mortgage or student loan. Nobody is buying consumer goods with the printed money and therefore we don't get to see inflation (which by definition only looks at consumer spending). We might get to see "real" inflation if that printed money is used to pay for unemployment benefits or to pay salaries.