5 ms·

Reopening is an illusion - behaviors change rationally in response to the environment. Bars will have patrons, but won't be as busy. People will travel, but no

Reopening is an illusion - behaviors change rationally in response to the environment. Bars will have patrons, but won't be as busy. People will travel, but not as much. Restaurants will still serve food, but half will be delivery. The govt. has little control over real economic productivity except by handling the pandemic and the economic shocks produced by it.

shadowgovt 6y ago
Exactly. While things are closed, there's a reason for restaurants to demand support from the government. Everyone suffers, but homogeneously and less. If we open up, support from the government zeroes out and bars and restaurants will find themselves in two circumstances: they will be partially full because people are scared to be in public (and will struggle to make ends meet and maybe fail), or they will be plenty full until someone brings in COVID-19, a bunch of folks get sick, contact-tracing tracks it back to the bar or restaurant, word gets around, and business at that place crashes because it's a plague vector. Some businesses will win in this circumstance. Most will lose. It's a bit of a prisoner's dilemma deal.
- matz1 6y ago
  > they will be plenty full until someone brings in COVID-19 Someone will bring covid 19, sure, that is fully expected, we know that since the virus spread easily, but we also know majority of them will be not get stick or only have some mild symptom. no need contact tracing, no need to get panic.
  - chooseaname 6y ago
    This argument doesn't give a shit about the ones who do get sick.
  - selykg 6y ago
    Ah yes, the whole "Most people won't show symptoms so that's okay" ploy. Next you'll be saying "kids are basically immune"
    - catalogia 6y ago
      ...Are they not?
      - shadowgovt 6y ago
        Kids are, sadly, not immune. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6931e1.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6931e1.htm
        catalogia 6y ago
        > Basically immune That link doesn't really contradict that. It contradicts actually immune, since kids can obviously catch it. However most, particularly young children, don't show symptoms. And most of those that do show symptoms only have mild symptoms. So yes, basically immune. Kids don't have much to fear themselves, the concern is that they'll infect adults who actually do have something to fear.
        shadowgovt 6y ago
        I see what you mean. I wouldn't classify that as "basically immune;" "less susceptible to deadly symptoms" maybe. Immunity should include a lack of ability to communicate the disease, which is not demonstrated at all. ... and I still wouldn't put money on children being immune enough to, say, safely open schools even if we discard the child->adult transmission risk. Over half the youngest demographic in the Georgia camp were infected, and children are dying from this disease, even if at a lower rate than adults (how much lower is a really important question).
        catalogia 6y ago
        > and children are dying from this disease, even if at a lower rate than adults (how much lower is a really important question). The data I've found is: Under 1: 15 deaths 1-4: 10 deaths 5-14: 20 deaths 15-24: 225 deaths The curve continues from there, peaking at 45,845 for 85 years or older. So yes, some kids do die, or at least they had covid when they died. But if this were all covid was, we certainly wouldn't have closed schools for the kids' sake over this. Clearly schools are closed due to the threat posed to teachers. https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-...
  - mschuster91 6y ago
    > but we also know majority of them will be not get stick or only have some mild symptom That is utterly, utterly wrong. Even in those with only moderate symptoms, damage across the body results from catching the 'rona: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/07/brain-fog-heart-damage-covid-19-s-lingering-problems-alarm-scientists https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/07/brain-fog-heart-dama... And it's across the body that the 'rona does long lasting damage, this is pretty rare in any form of sickness. And it's going to bite economies in the butt for many, many decades to come. The only way to prevent this is to prevent people from getting infected.
    - matz1 6y ago
      of course some population of people will have long term damage, any disease could do that.
      - shadowgovt 6y ago
        Most don't; COVID-19 isn't "any disease." It's got both an R0 and a fatality (and, we've come to learn, long-term-injury) rate that are way too high to refrain from taking it seriously.
        matz1 6y ago
        fatality rate less than 1% is very low. In regards for long term injury, given enough spread any disease could cause long term damage in some of its population. Flu cause long term damage. The damage caused by lockdown is more than covid.
        shadowgovt 6y ago
        > fatality rate less than 1% is very low If I told you that every day you lived your normal life, you had a 1 in 100 chance of dying, would you take it? How about a 1 in 1,000 chance? That's an expected payoff of about three years before you die, Worth it? The breakeven point is different for different people, but I think even 0.1% chance of death is too high for most. Or flipping the numbers: if 100% of Americans become infected, a disease with a 0.1% fatality rate is about 350,000. That's more people than we lost in World War II.
NDizzle 6y ago
No, I mean I've had enough and I'm not alone. Reopen, let everyone go back to work.
- AbrahamParangi 6y ago
  There's no one stopping you from going back to work, except your coworkers who don't want to.
- doopy-loopy2 6y ago
  This. Open everything. If you are worried, stay home. Otherwise, fuck off!
  - Thorncorona 6y ago
    Yes because everyone is rich and can choose not to work, so let's force immunocompromised Americans to go back to work. Excellent idea.
puranjay 6y ago
Everything has opened back up in my city but it's been four months since the first lockdown and now my behavior has changed. I no longer want those old experiences again, at least not as frequently. I think everyone is underestimating the behavioral changes two months of lockdown can bring about. 60 days is exactly the number of days you need to cement a habit. We've had more than that. If even 10% of the people end up changing their behavioral patterns, businesses that depend on these customers have 10% lower business. That's huge, especially when you borrowed debt expect +10% growth, not -10%

shadowgovt 6y ago

Exactly. While things are closed, there's a reason for restaurants to demand support from the government. Everyone suffers, but homogeneously and less. If we open up, support from the government zeroes out and bars and restaurants will find themselves in two circumstances: they will be partially full because people are scared to be in public (and will struggle to make ends meet and maybe fail), or they will be plenty full until someone brings in COVID-19, a bunch of folks get sick, contact-tracing tracks it back to the bar or restaurant, word gets around, and business at that place crashes because it's a plague vector. Some businesses will win in this circumstance. Most will lose. It's a bit of a prisoner's dilemma deal.

matz1 6y ago
> they will be plenty full until someone brings in COVID-19 Someone will bring covid 19, sure, that is fully expected, we know that since the virus spread easily, but we also know majority of them will be not get stick or only have some mild symptom. no need contact tracing, no need to get panic.
- chooseaname 6y ago
  This argument doesn't give a shit about the ones who do get sick.
- selykg 6y ago
  Ah yes, the whole "Most people won't show symptoms so that's okay" ploy. Next you'll be saying "kids are basically immune"
  - catalogia 6y ago
    ...Are they not?
    - shadowgovt 6y ago
      Kids are, sadly, not immune. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6931e1.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6931e1.htm
      - catalogia 6y ago
        > Basically immune That link doesn't really contradict that. It contradicts actually immune, since kids can obviously catch it. However most, particularly young children, don't show symptoms. And most of those that do show symptoms only have mild symptoms. So yes, basically immune. Kids don't have much to fear themselves, the concern is that they'll infect adults who actually do have something to fear.
        shadowgovt 6y ago
        I see what you mean. I wouldn't classify that as "basically immune;" "less susceptible to deadly symptoms" maybe. Immunity should include a lack of ability to communicate the disease, which is not demonstrated at all. ... and I still wouldn't put money on children being immune enough to, say, safely open schools even if we discard the child->adult transmission risk. Over half the youngest demographic in the Georgia camp were infected, and children are dying from this disease, even if at a lower rate than adults (how much lower is a really important question).
        catalogia 6y ago
        > and children are dying from this disease, even if at a lower rate than adults (how much lower is a really important question). The data I've found is: Under 1: 15 deaths 1-4: 10 deaths 5-14: 20 deaths 15-24: 225 deaths The curve continues from there, peaking at 45,845 for 85 years or older. So yes, some kids do die, or at least they had covid when they died. But if this were all covid was, we certainly wouldn't have closed schools for the kids' sake over this. Clearly schools are closed due to the threat posed to teachers. https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-...
- mschuster91 6y ago
  > but we also know majority of them will be not get stick or only have some mild symptom That is utterly, utterly wrong. Even in those with only moderate symptoms, damage across the body results from catching the 'rona: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/07/brain-fog-heart-damage-covid-19-s-lingering-problems-alarm-scientists https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/07/brain-fog-heart-dama... And it's across the body that the 'rona does long lasting damage, this is pretty rare in any form of sickness. And it's going to bite economies in the butt for many, many decades to come. The only way to prevent this is to prevent people from getting infected.
  - matz1 6y ago
    of course some population of people will have long term damage, any disease could do that.
    - shadowgovt 6y ago
      Most don't; COVID-19 isn't "any disease." It's got both an R0 and a fatality (and, we've come to learn, long-term-injury) rate that are way too high to refrain from taking it seriously.
      - matz1 6y ago
        fatality rate less than 1% is very low. In regards for long term injury, given enough spread any disease could cause long term damage in some of its population. Flu cause long term damage. The damage caused by lockdown is more than covid.
        shadowgovt 6y ago
        > fatality rate less than 1% is very low If I told you that every day you lived your normal life, you had a 1 in 100 chance of dying, would you take it? How about a 1 in 1,000 chance? That's an expected payoff of about three years before you die, Worth it? The breakeven point is different for different people, but I think even 0.1% chance of death is too high for most. Or flipping the numbers: if 100% of Americans become infected, a disease with a 0.1% fatality rate is about 350,000. That's more people than we lost in World War II.

NDizzle 6y ago

No, I mean I've had enough and I'm not alone. Reopen, let everyone go back to work.

AbrahamParangi 6y ago
There's no one stopping you from going back to work, except your coworkers who don't want to.
doopy-loopy2 6y ago
This. Open everything. If you are worried, stay home. Otherwise, fuck off!
- Thorncorona 6y ago
  Yes because everyone is rich and can choose not to work, so let's force immunocompromised Americans to go back to work. Excellent idea.

puranjay 6y ago

Everything has opened back up in my city but it's been four months since the first lockdown and now my behavior has changed. I no longer want those old experiences again, at least not as frequently. I think everyone is underestimating the behavioral changes two months of lockdown can bring about. 60 days is exactly the number of days you need to cement a habit. We've had more than that. If even 10% of the people end up changing their behavioral patterns, businesses that depend on these customers have 10% lower business. That's huge, especially when you borrowed debt expect +10% growth, not -10%