Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

ma.ttias.be

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 436 posts

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#101

Post by 0x8BADF00D »

helij wrote: post #19
mtsr wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I interpreted it like this: deaths are less expensive than lost productivity. This might actually hold given the groups that are the most at risk are probably least productive: the old and the infirm.

Not aimed at you, but, I am disgusted at even a mention of these kind of 'calculations'. And yes, I am prepared to take a hit in my earnings, paying higher taxes if needed after this if that is what it takes for at least one person more to live.

How about 99% of your income? Your assets? How much is a stranger’s life worth to you.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#102

Post by teekert »

tomp wrote: post #31

I think it's a different reason. Let's analyze the outcomes from game theory perspective, along two dimensions: virus becomes pandemic or not, and governments do something or nothing. 1) no pandemic, no action -> government was "right", avoided wasting money -> reelected 2) no pandemic, action -> government was "wrong", wasted a lot of money, damaged the economy, inconvenienced the lives of the population -> voted ou…

I think we should not attribute to malice what we can explain by not being able to get your sht together. Belgium did't have a government for a very long time because they couldn't get the sht together. I think they are just overwhelmed and scared.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#103

Post by _jal »

tomp wrote: post #31

I think it's a different reason. Let's analyze the outcomes from game theory perspective, along two dimensions: virus becomes pandemic or not, and governments do something or nothing. 1) no pandemic, no action -> government was "right", avoided wasting money -> reelected 2) no pandemic, action -> government was "wrong", wasted a lot of money, damaged the economy, inconvenienced the lives of the population -> voted ou…

> So, politicians choose (1), no action, as the most likely winning scenario.

I have serious doubts about this model, but will play along.

What explains:

(a) The exceptions - some countries are acting and doing well. Others are doing better after a delay.

(b) Past, more aggressive actions - many countries, the US included, have responded much more quickly and competently to acute disease crises.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#104

Post by gambiting »

the8472 wrote: post #93
tomp wrote: post #31

I think it's a different reason. Let's analyze the outcomes from game theory perspective, along two dimensions: virus becomes pandemic or not, and governments do something or nothing. 1) no pandemic, no action -> government was "right", avoided wasting money -> reelected 2) no pandemic, action -> government was "wrong", wasted a lot of money, damaged the economy, inconvenienced the lives of the population -> voted ou…

> 4a) pandemic, action, it works -> government was "right", saved lives, spared the economy -> reelected This is too optimistic. If it works then people see a tiny death rate and a shutdown forced by the government. The greatest success will look like an overreaction.

Yeah I'm not so sure. In Poland the actions are on the "extreme" side so far, and not many people complain, because sights and news from Italy are constantly brought up as comparison. It's constantly "unless we want to be as screwed as Italy is, we need to do X" and not many people complain about X.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#106

Post by mtsr »

Udik wrote: post #66
matwood wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the Netherlands, seasonal influenza has ~1% mortality rate Yikes! If true, do you know why that is?

I don't know, but I live in the Netherlands (as an expat) and their approach to healthcare is legendary for its sloppiness. The most common joke is about doctors responding to any health complaint by handing some paracetamol and saying "come back in two weeks if you don't feel better". Three days ago the government held a special meeting about the coronavirus, in which they deliberated that people should stop shaking…

Nevertheless health care outcomes on average are pretty good, if you look at things like life expectancy...

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#107

Post by avip »

tomp wrote: post #31

I think it's a different reason. Let's analyze the outcomes from game theory perspective, along two dimensions: virus becomes pandemic or not, and governments do something or nothing. 1) no pandemic, no action -> government was "right", avoided wasting money -> reelected 2) no pandemic, action -> government was "wrong", wasted a lot of money, damaged the economy, inconvenienced the lives of the population -> voted ou…

Nothing in your analysis makes any sense.

First, there's no "no pandemic" case. Not anymore.

Second, your conclusion says that "politicians choose (1)" but that is not the case at all - almost every country in Europe, Asia, middle east had taken measures, with varying severity, and significant economic cost.

Last but not least, the whole framing is extremely simplistic and follows the "politicians are evil" reddit-like logic.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#108

Post by DennisP »

Udik wrote: post #66
matwood wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the Netherlands, seasonal influenza has ~1% mortality rate Yikes! If true, do you know why that is?

I don't know, but I live in the Netherlands (as an expat) and their approach to healthcare is legendary for its sloppiness. The most common joke is about doctors responding to any health complaint by handing some paracetamol and saying "come back in two weeks if you don't feel better". Three days ago the government held a special meeting about the coronavirus, in which they deliberated that people should stop shaking…

That's the generally accepted advice, unless you have shortness of breath.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#109

Post by kalleboo »

lm28469 wrote: post #47
rcMgD2BwE72F wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Denmark did close every school and most administrations. France did not. Many decisions can be taken, but are not (for various reasons). Most experts recommend to limit contacts rather than closing down borders, and no one is pretending to stop the virus but they all should try to flatten the curve. You don't seem to pay attention to the current situation.

It also depends on the country's government. Afaik in Germany the country's government can't force schools to close or public events to be cancelled. These decisions have to be taken locally (at state/city or even district level). All the health ministry can do is tell people "you shouldn't do A B C and you should do X Y Z"

Japan has the same limitation, but the government put out a "strong recommendation" for schools to close and all the local governments complied.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#110

Post by collyw »

tasogare wrote: post #27

They don’t act because they don’t care. It’s people dying, and their eyes are focused on purely economic metrics, not the well-being of the population or its survival. In the particular case of Europe, this is not the first thread that is totally discarded by the ruling elite, it’s the usual way of acting. It’s more visible with the virus because the timescale is shorter, but fundamentally there is no difference with…

If its only economic factors, don't you think that having an active workforce would make more sense to them?
Post reply on HN