5 ms·

Another story with tunnel vision. I don't pay attention to the NY Times, but have they had any opinion pieces suggesting that maybe the destruction of the econ

Another story with tunnel vision. I don't pay attention to the NY Times, but have they had any opinion pieces suggesting that maybe the destruction of the economy is also a bad thing? And, maybe, someone besides a reporter or "health expert" should make some kind of attempt to determine if it is even possible to sustain these policies? I really feel like I'm in a Tales from Dark Side episode.

akhilcacharya 6y ago
Demand is going to be decreased no matter if everything opens up or not.
- generalpass 6y ago
  > Demand is going to be decreased no matter if everything opens up or not. Sure, but is it possible to posit that, or to at least discuss, some nuance of at least some variance of some sort: A. Demand is going to be decreased, and a bunch of people are going to starve to death (or, more likely, take to the streets with their pitch forks and torches). B. Demand is going to be decreased, and recovery will be difficult.
zaphar 6y ago
The New York Times reporters generally consult experts when they write stories like these. Just because their is a reporters name next to it doesn't imply the reporter fabricated all the data they are using and that no health experts were involved.
scarface74 6y ago
Even in areas where they are opening up, people aren’t in any hurry to travel unnecessarily, be in crowds, go to restaurants, etc. Covid’s effect on the economy is going to be devastating no matter what the official policy is.
- generalpass 6y ago
  > Even in areas where they are opening up, people aren’t in any hurry to travel unnecessarily, be in crowds, go to restaurants, etc. Covid’s effect on the economy is going to devastating no matter what the official policy is. Interesting that you have changed the topic. This is indicative of a broad problem that I am observing: nobody wants to discuss economic consequences and even mentioning this will result in either very heavy down-voting or outright deplatforming[1]. My question is rather specific to how long the economy can last while held in lockdown and whether the Times has ever reported such concerns. The economy does things like bring us food and pay for the health care that is supposed to save us from the virus. Without the economy, we don't have food and we don't have health care. If some percentage of the population is actively blocked from having jobs while having no income, no government subsidies, and no savings, then "civil unrest" becomes reality. This is historically true. [1] If you think that discussion of the economy is somehow a hidden message about 5G, anti-vaxx, NWO, etc., then you really need to take some time to learn economics, and I would also suggest some critical thinking, philosophy, and reading comprehension review.
  - wcarey 6y ago
    The do have several articles of the sort you're interested in: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/16/business/economy/coronavirus-economy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/16/business/economy/coronavi... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/13/business/coronavirus-economy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/13/business/coronavirus-econ... are two examples.
    - generalpass 6y ago
      These seem to be general discussions about the state of the economy. They still are not making an attempt to forecast how long the economy can minimally support civilization without reopening. I don't see a "what is worse" analysis. I also don't see any mention of the myriad studies published demonstrating how mortality rates increase in many different ways during periods of economic decline.
  - mellow2020 6y ago
strathmeyer 6y ago
Maybe they assume everybody already knows that allowing lots of people to die is bad for the economy. Not to mention the perception of bad leadership.
- Mediterraneo10 6y ago
  > everybody already knows that allowing lots of people to die is bad for the economy We now know that half of all European deaths have been in care homes. The elderly in care homes are not significant contributors to the economy. (And over in resource-extraction states, most of the population is often regarded by local thinktanks as "superfluous" – Russia, for example, only needs about 10 million people to run its economy, and it makes little difference whether the virus affects the other ~135 million people!) Of course, there is a need to flatten the curve so that the virus doesn't begin to affect, by overloading the healthcare system, those demographics that are major drivers of the economy. You also don't want people to be scared of going out and consuming. However, if the curve can still be flattened sufficiently with businesses open, then there is little mandate to call for keeping them closed just to protect that aforementioned elderly demographic.
mellow2020 6y ago
I wonder if the people who just downvote you without comment don't realize that they're just proving your point, or if they just don't care about being that blatant.
- take_a_breath 6y ago
  The comment was asking for something that exists. It was only a google search away. Maybe OP should have done that search instead of making accusations that people are afraid to talk about something that they have already talked about.
  - mellow2020 6y ago
    > The comment was asking for something that exists. It was only a google search away. There are hundreds of commments each day that do the exact same thing. They might get ignored, they might get an answer, and in other contexts, it's even a totally joyous occasion, AKA https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/ > instead of making accusations that people are afraid to talk about something that they have already talked about Maybe if people want to frame this as an unfounded accusation, they shouldn't blindly downvote a comment like that within minutes of it being posted (not just one or two downvotes either, everybody piling on while they still can). As it is, it's demonstrated black on white. Or is there anything in my comments I "should have googled", too? What's the rationalization for them being punished? What rules do they violate?
    - take_a_breath 6y ago
      The comment didn’t add to the discussion. It admits ignorance on the NYT and their reporting, then proceeds to criticize their performance anyways. Now, we get the “turnaround and play victim angle” because anonymous people on the internet clicked an arrow facing down. Are downvotes “punishment”? Was OP accused of violating rules? How does downvoting prove the point that people are afraid to talk about opening the economy?
brown9-2 6y ago
There is reviving or fixing the economy until the pandemic ends. The government can urge stores and businesses and offices to open but we’ll still have destruction if large amounts of people are afraid for their health to go out or to commute to work.
infecto 6y ago
This is just my own experience but I think its just the usual political extreme sides arguing with each other. On the tea party side we have these crazy gun toting nuts (I own guns myself) that are yelling freedom and other crazy things regarding the lockdown. Storming government buildings with open carry and at least to me look like fools Then on the flip side in the Bay Area we have a bunch of tech workers, working from home and being comfy yelling that we cannot open up businesses and everyone is going to die that goes out. I look at my own company internal chat and its basically this. Unfortunately both sides and a lack of overall national leadership has detracted from the real discussion. Our news agencies on both sides are playing the extremes and nobody is talking about the real issue. Shelter-in-place does work but its only there to reduce the impact on hospitals. Its not there to prevent people from getting sick necessarily. We don't know how long this virus is going to be around. Maybe it disappears, maybe its here for a year. The whole point of sheltering is so hospitals can continue to work without being overburdened. I think in the Bay Area the hospitals have been extremely under-utilized. What we need are discussions on how to reopen safely. What type of rules do people need to follow when we do reopen. I don't want to argue what is legally allowed but I think things like wearing masks in public, public temperature checks, more testing and forcing quarantine of those and those that have been around them are all sensible if we want to get the economy going again.
- madengr 6y ago
  Well at this point it needs to be spread at a rate that keeps the hospitals filled (at say 80% capacity). So it’s probably good that you have people disregarding the lockdown, because at the present rate, it may take a really long time to reach herd immunity (which they say is 80% with immunity). Of course without widespread and continuous testing for the virus and antibodies, who knows how to achieve that rate. I actually am getting an antibody test through Quest tomorrow for $119. That way I’ll know if the chest cold and mild fever I had 6 weeks ago (with still lingering cough) was allergy related or the virus.
- watwut 6y ago
  > Then on the flip side in the Bay Area we have a bunch of tech workers, working from home and being comfy yelling that we cannot open up businesses and everyone is going to die that goes out. Based on polls, most Americans are for shelter in place and are afraid of economy opening up too soon. The people who are for opening are not concentrated within groups who lost jobs, but are rather spread out over the society. The thing about lower paid workers is that they are also the most affected by Covid, most likely to get it, more likely to die from it and more likely to know someone who dies. More affected by healthcare price too if they dont die but merely need hospital. You can see that in stats from New Yourk too - middle class people able to work from home and just not as much affected as those who work in low paid jobs. The place where I see most pressure for opening economy is HN - Bay Area tech workers. People here dont work in meat plants nor in essential services nor in Amazon. Their employers wont have them working in close proximity with other people even when those are having symptoms. They wont get Covid and wont spread it to elderly relatives regardless of whether economy is open or not.

akhilcacharya 6y ago

Demand is going to be decreased no matter if everything opens up or not.

generalpass 6y ago
> Demand is going to be decreased no matter if everything opens up or not. Sure, but is it possible to posit that, or to at least discuss, some nuance of at least some variance of some sort: A. Demand is going to be decreased, and a bunch of people are going to starve to death (or, more likely, take to the streets with their pitch forks and torches). B. Demand is going to be decreased, and recovery will be difficult.

zaphar 6y ago

The New York Times reporters generally consult experts when they write stories like these. Just because their is a reporters name next to it doesn't imply the reporter fabricated all the data they are using and that no health experts were involved.

scarface74 6y ago

Even in areas where they are opening up, people aren’t in any hurry to travel unnecessarily, be in crowds, go to restaurants, etc. Covid’s effect on the economy is going to be devastating no matter what the official policy is.

generalpass 6y ago
> Even in areas where they are opening up, people aren’t in any hurry to travel unnecessarily, be in crowds, go to restaurants, etc. Covid’s effect on the economy is going to devastating no matter what the official policy is. Interesting that you have changed the topic. This is indicative of a broad problem that I am observing: nobody wants to discuss economic consequences and even mentioning this will result in either very heavy down-voting or outright deplatforming[1]. My question is rather specific to how long the economy can last while held in lockdown and whether the Times has ever reported such concerns. The economy does things like bring us food and pay for the health care that is supposed to save us from the virus. Without the economy, we don't have food and we don't have health care. If some percentage of the population is actively blocked from having jobs while having no income, no government subsidies, and no savings, then "civil unrest" becomes reality. This is historically true. [1] If you think that discussion of the economy is somehow a hidden message about 5G, anti-vaxx, NWO, etc., then you really need to take some time to learn economics, and I would also suggest some critical thinking, philosophy, and reading comprehension review.
- wcarey 6y ago
  The do have several articles of the sort you're interested in: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/16/business/economy/coronavirus-economy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/16/business/economy/coronavi... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/13/business/coronavirus-economy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/13/business/coronavirus-econ... are two examples.
  - generalpass 6y ago
    These seem to be general discussions about the state of the economy. They still are not making an attempt to forecast how long the economy can minimally support civilization without reopening. I don't see a "what is worse" analysis. I also don't see any mention of the myriad studies published demonstrating how mortality rates increase in many different ways during periods of economic decline.
- mellow2020 6y ago

strathmeyer 6y ago

Maybe they assume everybody already knows that allowing lots of people to die is bad for the economy. Not to mention the perception of bad leadership.

Mediterraneo10 6y ago
> everybody already knows that allowing lots of people to die is bad for the economy We now know that half of all European deaths have been in care homes. The elderly in care homes are not significant contributors to the economy. (And over in resource-extraction states, most of the population is often regarded by local thinktanks as "superfluous" – Russia, for example, only needs about 10 million people to run its economy, and it makes little difference whether the virus affects the other ~135 million people!) Of course, there is a need to flatten the curve so that the virus doesn't begin to affect, by overloading the healthcare system, those demographics that are major drivers of the economy. You also don't want people to be scared of going out and consuming. However, if the curve can still be flattened sufficiently with businesses open, then there is little mandate to call for keeping them closed just to protect that aforementioned elderly demographic.

mellow2020 6y ago

I wonder if the people who just downvote you without comment don't realize that they're just proving your point, or if they just don't care about being that blatant.

take_a_breath 6y ago
The comment was asking for something that exists. It was only a google search away. Maybe OP should have done that search instead of making accusations that people are afraid to talk about something that they have already talked about.
- mellow2020 6y ago
  > The comment was asking for something that exists. It was only a google search away. There are hundreds of commments each day that do the exact same thing. They might get ignored, they might get an answer, and in other contexts, it's even a totally joyous occasion, AKA https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/ > instead of making accusations that people are afraid to talk about something that they have already talked about Maybe if people want to frame this as an unfounded accusation, they shouldn't blindly downvote a comment like that within minutes of it being posted (not just one or two downvotes either, everybody piling on while they still can). As it is, it's demonstrated black on white. Or is there anything in my comments I "should have googled", too? What's the rationalization for them being punished? What rules do they violate?
  - take_a_breath 6y ago
    The comment didn’t add to the discussion. It admits ignorance on the NYT and their reporting, then proceeds to criticize their performance anyways. Now, we get the “turnaround and play victim angle” because anonymous people on the internet clicked an arrow facing down. Are downvotes “punishment”? Was OP accused of violating rules? How does downvoting prove the point that people are afraid to talk about opening the economy?

brown9-2 6y ago

There is reviving or fixing the economy until the pandemic ends. The government can urge stores and businesses and offices to open but we’ll still have destruction if large amounts of people are afraid for their health to go out or to commute to work.

infecto 6y ago

This is just my own experience but I think its just the usual political extreme sides arguing with each other. On the tea party side we have these crazy gun toting nuts (I own guns myself) that are yelling freedom and other crazy things regarding the lockdown. Storming government buildings with open carry and at least to me look like fools Then on the flip side in the Bay Area we have a bunch of tech workers, working from home and being comfy yelling that we cannot open up businesses and everyone is going to die that goes out. I look at my own company internal chat and its basically this. Unfortunately both sides and a lack of overall national leadership has detracted from the real discussion. Our news agencies on both sides are playing the extremes and nobody is talking about the real issue. Shelter-in-place does work but its only there to reduce the impact on hospitals. Its not there to prevent people from getting sick necessarily. We don't know how long this virus is going to be around. Maybe it disappears, maybe its here for a year. The whole point of sheltering is so hospitals can continue to work without being overburdened. I think in the Bay Area the hospitals have been extremely under-utilized. What we need are discussions on how to reopen safely. What type of rules do people need to follow when we do reopen. I don't want to argue what is legally allowed but I think things like wearing masks in public, public temperature checks, more testing and forcing quarantine of those and those that have been around them are all sensible if we want to get the economy going again.

madengr 6y ago
Well at this point it needs to be spread at a rate that keeps the hospitals filled (at say 80% capacity). So it’s probably good that you have people disregarding the lockdown, because at the present rate, it may take a really long time to reach herd immunity (which they say is 80% with immunity). Of course without widespread and continuous testing for the virus and antibodies, who knows how to achieve that rate. I actually am getting an antibody test through Quest tomorrow for $119. That way I’ll know if the chest cold and mild fever I had 6 weeks ago (with still lingering cough) was allergy related or the virus.
watwut 6y ago
> Then on the flip side in the Bay Area we have a bunch of tech workers, working from home and being comfy yelling that we cannot open up businesses and everyone is going to die that goes out. Based on polls, most Americans are for shelter in place and are afraid of economy opening up too soon. The people who are for opening are not concentrated within groups who lost jobs, but are rather spread out over the society. The thing about lower paid workers is that they are also the most affected by Covid, most likely to get it, more likely to die from it and more likely to know someone who dies. More affected by healthcare price too if they dont die but merely need hospital. You can see that in stats from New Yourk too - middle class people able to work from home and just not as much affected as those who work in low paid jobs. The place where I see most pressure for opening economy is HN - Bay Area tech workers. People here dont work in meat plants nor in essential services nor in Amazon. Their employers wont have them working in close proximity with other people even when those are having symptoms. They wont get Covid and wont spread it to elderly relatives regardless of whether economy is open or not.