5 ms·

Sure, we can compare city to city, but the comparison instantly falls apart, because that peak urban density is still nearly HALF of Singapore's entire density.

by bryans 5y ago

Sure, we can compare city to city, but the comparison instantly falls apart, because that peak urban density is still nearly HALF of Singapore's entire density. There is no universe in which 50% is considered a "minor" difference, and that's STILL pretending the rest of Sweden doesn't even exist. That is the definition of an apples-to-oranges argument. In regards to the suicides, you just referenced an individual's personal thoughts on a potential reason for part of the increase. That's not evidence of anything, especially given that the statistical trend was already rising sharply upward, meaning there were existing issues being exacerbated long before COVID showed up. Even if we pretend that 100% of the 52 additional suicides in 2020 (a death rate of 12.6/mil) were directly caused by lockdowns, that's still a small fraction of the number of COVID deaths resulting from not having lockdowns, as is evidenced by ANY country's statistics. So, yeah, you are ignoring all of the obvious facts that refute your assertions, which makes you disinformative.

refurb 5y ago
Wow! You sure back down quickly. You originally said we should use Sweden's 25 people/sq km and now you're willing to concede that in reality it's half? And sorry, but Singapore and Stockholm have the same population density in terms of order of magnitude. Come on man. Just admit you were wrong.
- bryans 5y ago
  Are you kidding me right now? You suggested we use the densest part of Sweden as a comparison, which is not how comparisons actually work, but I humored you anyway -- and it's still nearly HALF, which makes it not even comparable. So even when you unfairly nit-pick a particular region of Sweden, you're still completely wrong in all of your assertions. Your trolling is off the charts right now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore Total area: 728.6 km2 Density: 7,804/km2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm Urban area: 381.63 km2 Urban density: 4,200/km2 Metro area: 6,519 km2 Metro density: 370/km2
  - refurb 5y ago
    Half the density is "not even comparable"? You're not even arguing in good faith. You've just been proven wrong and now you're moving the goalposts and trying again. My point was nothing more than the density is not that different, and your numbers show that.
    - bryans 5y ago
      This is so far beyond ridiculous at this point. Everything you say is the opposite of reality and with the direction intention of gaslighting and causing chaos. You are a troll of the highest order, and I'm honestly not sure why you're allowed to pull this kind of shit on HN.
      - refurb 5y ago
        Seems like you're the one gaslighting. The entire point I was making was that despite a very strict lockdown, Singapore is seeing really significant case numbers and deaths and they still aren't through it yet. All of those things are true. Once the total costs of lockdown are fully tallied, we may find out the return on those restrictions weren't as high as we thought they would be.
        bryans 5y ago
        > The entire point I was making was that despite a very strict lockdown, Singapore is seeing really significant case numbers and deaths and they still aren't through it yet. All of those things are true. That's not the point you were making at all and you know it, so now you're just further gaslighting -- and you haven't been remotely correct about any of it. Let's recap. > Maybe better to compare to Singapore which had ~6 deaths per million earlier this year, has one of the highest vaccination rates in the world but since barely relaxing their restrictions now has ~120 deaths per million, raging number of cases (mostly vaccinated) and had the highest level of suicides last year since 2012? You wanted to compare Sweden to Singapore, but got called out for making a poor comparison given the drastic differences in population density. You also suggested that suicide rates increased because of lockdowns, without any evidence for that whatsoever, while also baselessly suggesting that more people died from lockdowns than would have from COVID, which is just completely false by every metric. > Why calculate density of Sweden based on the total country when most people live in a couple cities? Your response was to immediately move the goal post and limit the comparison to Sweden's most populated areas, while also making another false claim that "most" Swedes live in two cities, despite >65% of Swedes NOT living in those two cities. I played along with your trolling and explained why that's still a completely irrelevant comparison. > Looking at city to city (Singapore is a city state) the density differences are minor. [...] And in in terms of suicides they were up 13% in one year. Your response was to move the goal post AGAIN, to now strictly include the densest part of urban Stockholm itself. Unfortunately, even the densest part of Sweden's densest city isn't remotely similar to Singapore, especially given that the densest of Singapore's subzones have 45,000/km2, which is nearly 10x that of Stockholm's densest city center. You also tried to use one person's musings as evidence that suicides were directly tied to lockdowns, even though the person didn't even claim that connection -- and at this point, you're still trying to insist that Singapore's "lockdown-induced" suicide rate increase is higher than Sweden's non-lockdown COVID death rate. > Wow! You sure back down quickly. You originally said we should use Sweden's 25 people/sq km and now you're willing to concede that in reality it's half? And sorry, but Singapore and Stockholm have the same population density in terms of order of magnitude. Here's where your trolling becomes egregious, because despite your decision to repeatedly put new, unfair and illogical restrictions on the comparison, you've now claimed that I was the one who changed the parameters. In reality, all I did was prove you wrong no matter how many times YOU decided to change the rules. In a last ditch effort to pretend your arguments have any footing, you also made a new claim that 4,000 is the same as 8,000 because they have the same number of digits, which is beyond absurd. You also conveniently dropped your suicide rate argument at this point, because you ran out of manufactured and personally theorized "evidence." > Half the density is "not even comparable"? You're not even arguing in good faith. You've just been proven wrong and now you're moving the goalposts and trying again. You're now claiming that 50% is similar to 100%, which again, is beyond absurd. At this point, you've also completely misdirected away from the actual comparison between Singapore and Sweden being drastically lower than half, which is the case even for Stockholm alone when you more appropriately include the metropolitan area. You also repeated your claim that I moved the goal posts, which we've already established was your decision and not mine. To summarize, you made two nonsensical claims in defense of 15,000 people dying, then moved the goal post, then moved it again, then moved it again while also inventing new word definitions. Then when you ran out of excuses for making such ridiculous claims and couldn't find any evidence to back them up, you started trollishly claiming that I was the one who decided to change the comparison. By all means, explain how I'm the one gaslighting.

by bryans 5y ago

refurb 5y ago

Wow! You sure back down quickly. You originally said we should use Sweden's 25 people/sq km and now you're willing to concede that in reality it's half? And sorry, but Singapore and Stockholm have the same population density in terms of order of magnitude. Come on man. Just admit you were wrong.

bryans 5y ago
Are you kidding me right now? You suggested we use the densest part of Sweden as a comparison, which is not how comparisons actually work, but I humored you anyway -- and it's still nearly HALF, which makes it not even comparable. So even when you unfairly nit-pick a particular region of Sweden, you're still completely wrong in all of your assertions. Your trolling is off the charts right now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore Total area: 728.6 km2 Density: 7,804/km2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm Urban area: 381.63 km2 Urban density: 4,200/km2 Metro area: 6,519 km2 Metro density: 370/km2
- refurb 5y ago
  Half the density is "not even comparable"? You're not even arguing in good faith. You've just been proven wrong and now you're moving the goalposts and trying again. My point was nothing more than the density is not that different, and your numbers show that.
  - bryans 5y ago
    This is so far beyond ridiculous at this point. Everything you say is the opposite of reality and with the direction intention of gaslighting and causing chaos. You are a troll of the highest order, and I'm honestly not sure why you're allowed to pull this kind of shit on HN.
    - refurb 5y ago
      Seems like you're the one gaslighting. The entire point I was making was that despite a very strict lockdown, Singapore is seeing really significant case numbers and deaths and they still aren't through it yet. All of those things are true. Once the total costs of lockdown are fully tallied, we may find out the return on those restrictions weren't as high as we thought they would be.
      - bryans 5y ago
        > The entire point I was making was that despite a very strict lockdown, Singapore is seeing really significant case numbers and deaths and they still aren't through it yet. All of those things are true. That's not the point you were making at all and you know it, so now you're just further gaslighting -- and you haven't been remotely correct about any of it. Let's recap. > Maybe better to compare to Singapore which had ~6 deaths per million earlier this year, has one of the highest vaccination rates in the world but since barely relaxing their restrictions now has ~120 deaths per million, raging number of cases (mostly vaccinated) and had the highest level of suicides last year since 2012? You wanted to compare Sweden to Singapore, but got called out for making a poor comparison given the drastic differences in population density. You also suggested that suicide rates increased because of lockdowns, without any evidence for that whatsoever, while also baselessly suggesting that more people died from lockdowns than would have from COVID, which is just completely false by every metric. > Why calculate density of Sweden based on the total country when most people live in a couple cities? Your response was to immediately move the goal post and limit the comparison to Sweden's most populated areas, while also making another false claim that "most" Swedes live in two cities, despite >65% of Swedes NOT living in those two cities. I played along with your trolling and explained why that's still a completely irrelevant comparison. > Looking at city to city (Singapore is a city state) the density differences are minor. [...] And in in terms of suicides they were up 13% in one year. Your response was to move the goal post AGAIN, to now strictly include the densest part of urban Stockholm itself. Unfortunately, even the densest part of Sweden's densest city isn't remotely similar to Singapore, especially given that the densest of Singapore's subzones have 45,000/km2, which is nearly 10x that of Stockholm's densest city center. You also tried to use one person's musings as evidence that suicides were directly tied to lockdowns, even though the person didn't even claim that connection -- and at this point, you're still trying to insist that Singapore's "lockdown-induced" suicide rate increase is higher than Sweden's non-lockdown COVID death rate. > Wow! You sure back down quickly. You originally said we should use Sweden's 25 people/sq km and now you're willing to concede that in reality it's half? And sorry, but Singapore and Stockholm have the same population density in terms of order of magnitude. Here's where your trolling becomes egregious, because despite your decision to repeatedly put new, unfair and illogical restrictions on the comparison, you've now claimed that I was the one who changed the parameters. In reality, all I did was prove you wrong no matter how many times YOU decided to change the rules. In a last ditch effort to pretend your arguments have any footing, you also made a new claim that 4,000 is the same as 8,000 because they have the same number of digits, which is beyond absurd. You also conveniently dropped your suicide rate argument at this point, because you ran out of manufactured and personally theorized "evidence." > Half the density is "not even comparable"? You're not even arguing in good faith. You've just been proven wrong and now you're moving the goalposts and trying again. You're now claiming that 50% is similar to 100%, which again, is beyond absurd. At this point, you've also completely misdirected away from the actual comparison between Singapore and Sweden being drastically lower than half, which is the case even for Stockholm alone when you more appropriately include the metropolitan area. You also repeated your claim that I moved the goal posts, which we've already established was your decision and not mine. To summarize, you made two nonsensical claims in defense of 15,000 people dying, then moved the goal post, then moved it again, then moved it again while also inventing new word definitions. Then when you ran out of excuses for making such ridiculous claims and couldn't find any evidence to back them up, you started trollishly claiming that I was the one who decided to change the comparison. By all means, explain how I'm the one gaslighting.