5 ms·

To be fair, the government created that problem too

by towaway15463 4y ago

vkou 4y ago
In order to deal with the bigger problem of the mass death and an overwhelmed medical system in a pre-vaccine world.
- seibelj 4y ago
  It appears that places without lockdowns (Florida, Sweden) did as good or far better than places with severe lockdowns (California, New York). So I still don’t see the evidence despite all the spittle from supposed scientists who know such things.
  - ajross 4y ago
    > (Florida, Sweden) did as good or far better than places with severe lockdowns (California, New York) That's just wildly wrong, FWIW. Per capita covid fatalities are 50% higher in Florida than California[1]. Sweden is even more of an outlier, fully three times more (per capita) Swedes are dead from covid than Norwegians. [1] And only matches NY if you try to cook books by including the initial wave of fatalities from the initial outbreak that were contracted before lockdown.
    - guerrilla 4y ago
      > Sweden is even more of an outlier, fully three times more (per capita) Swedes are dead from covid than Norwegians. I double checked your numbers and indeed I got that we had 3.09x deaths per capita compared to Norway. Also, we did have partial lockdown and many voluntary measures that were followed. Bars we closed down, restaurants were pretty restricted, there were measures on public transportation, many people used masks, very many people worked from home and there was mass testing and stay-at-home orders and such. So, I'm saying, it could have been even worse.
      - vkou 4y ago
        In short, you had a lockdown that was more severe than anything in the United States.
        guerrilla 4y ago
        No, that's not the impression I have, but I wasn't in the US at the time. It was definitely more liberal than anywhere in Europe for sure though. Don't you remember all the articles about how Sweden is "doing nothing"?
    - seibelj 4y ago
      https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-adjusted-covid-deaths/ https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-... Age adjusted deaths are basically equal for California and Florida, and vastly higher in NY. Florida was essentially an open air party with no mask mandates way back in summer 2021. No one wants to look at reality.
      - ajross 4y ago
        "Age-adjusted death" has never been a term of art anywhere in the history on epidemiology. It's a term invented during the COVID-19 pandemic precisely to make the argument you are attempting here. It's wrong, and it's deliberately misleading.
        seibelj 4y ago
        I don’t think any amount of evidence will convince the never-freedom mask-forever types. The mass deaths and horrors beyond comprehension prophesied for those who dared walk maskless simply never happened.
        ajross 4y ago
        Now you're moving goalposts and going weirdly ad-hominem. The subject was economics, whether saving 2-12M lives globally (extrapolation from the numbers under discussion) was worth a few quarters of heightened inflation. I don't recall anyone claiming you need "mass deaths and horrors beyond comprehension" to justify tolerating 8% inflation. But given the actual measured impact? Yes, that seems undeniably tolerable to me. It's the right call.

To be fair, the government created that problem too

vkou 4y ago

In order to deal with the bigger problem of the mass death and an overwhelmed medical system in a pre-vaccine world.

seibelj 4y ago
It appears that places without lockdowns (Florida, Sweden) did as good or far better than places with severe lockdowns (California, New York). So I still don’t see the evidence despite all the spittle from supposed scientists who know such things.
- ajross 4y ago
  > (Florida, Sweden) did as good or far better than places with severe lockdowns (California, New York) That's just wildly wrong, FWIW. Per capita covid fatalities are 50% higher in Florida than California[1]. Sweden is even more of an outlier, fully three times more (per capita) Swedes are dead from covid than Norwegians. [1] And only matches NY if you try to cook books by including the initial wave of fatalities from the initial outbreak that were contracted before lockdown.
  - guerrilla 4y ago
    > Sweden is even more of an outlier, fully three times more (per capita) Swedes are dead from covid than Norwegians. I double checked your numbers and indeed I got that we had 3.09x deaths per capita compared to Norway. Also, we did have partial lockdown and many voluntary measures that were followed. Bars we closed down, restaurants were pretty restricted, there were measures on public transportation, many people used masks, very many people worked from home and there was mass testing and stay-at-home orders and such. So, I'm saying, it could have been even worse.
    - vkou 4y ago
      In short, you had a lockdown that was more severe than anything in the United States.
      - guerrilla 4y ago
        No, that's not the impression I have, but I wasn't in the US at the time. It was definitely more liberal than anywhere in Europe for sure though. Don't you remember all the articles about how Sweden is "doing nothing"?
  - seibelj 4y ago
    https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-adjusted-covid-deaths/ https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-... Age adjusted deaths are basically equal for California and Florida, and vastly higher in NY. Florida was essentially an open air party with no mask mandates way back in summer 2021. No one wants to look at reality.
    - ajross 4y ago
      "Age-adjusted death" has never been a term of art anywhere in the history on epidemiology. It's a term invented during the COVID-19 pandemic precisely to make the argument you are attempting here. It's wrong, and it's deliberately misleading.
      - seibelj 4y ago
        I don’t think any amount of evidence will convince the never-freedom mask-forever types. The mass deaths and horrors beyond comprehension prophesied for those who dared walk maskless simply never happened.
        ajross 4y ago
        Now you're moving goalposts and going weirdly ad-hominem. The subject was economics, whether saving 2-12M lives globally (extrapolation from the numbers under discussion) was worth a few quarters of heightened inflation. I don't recall anyone claiming you need "mass deaths and horrors beyond comprehension" to justify tolerating 8% inflation. But given the actual measured impact? Yes, that seems undeniably tolerable to me. It's the right call.