121–130 of 165 posts
Norway got more cases than denmark (622 vs 514), and our government is still asleep. The "wait and see" attitude makes shure they are always 3 steps behind.
This is actually a great opportunity for a natural experiment. AFAIK Norws and Swedes have similar cultures re: touching and kissing; probably very similar genetics too. Curiosity aside: hope you live long and lucky.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes, the specifics aren't out yet but a package is being put together right now by the government. We don't know yet how much, but the numbers are in the billions. The government is aware that this is a dificult situation financially for a lot of companies and are working to resolve it. A lot of it will be through delayed payment of taxes and VAT to keep cashflow.
One thing to keep in mind is that interest rates in Denmark is currently negative. That means that the government, and even large credit-worthy corporates, can borrow and actually get paid to do so. That makes weathering a storm like this relatively easy from an economics standpoint. It's easy to delay revenue and cover fixed costs without incurring any significant financing costs.
The economy isn't a GDP or stock market index; it is a complicated process for getting people what they want and need based on an estimate of how much we can afford to give them. It can't weather everyone parking up in any meaningful sense no matter what numbers are published in the ledgers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At this point the number of cases is slightly less important than the rate. Denmark's numbers are increasing at a rate that's unprecedented amongst all current COVID-19 outbreaks (amongst the data that is available). The past 2 days the numbers in Denmark have tripled twice (and are on track to triple another time today). You could expect Denmarks numbers to overtake Norway's before the end of today or whenever the n…
Probably more Danes to skiing in northern Italy. And who knows maybe the authorities have done a good job tracking down infected people -- implying that the number of unknown cases is small.
Something that I heard from an epidemiologist the other day is how shutting down schools and daycares can be incredibly counterproductive, because such a high percentage of health care workers have children which suddenly are at home and need to be supervised, pulling these workers out of their duties. I suppose its ok early on, but seems problematic if enough people eventually get infected. Understood that schools a…
I disagree here. Denmark is acting proactively and shutting down schools for 2 weeks. This is a "rip the band aid off early" type of move. By shutting down everything for 2 weeks, they effectively self-quarantine during the entire incubation period and will dramatically slow the rate of the virus. China, on the other hand, did not do this, and they were forced to shut down schools for 6 months. These moves are HARD a…
Something that I heard from an epidemiologist the other day is how shutting down schools and daycares can be incredibly counterproductive, because such a high percentage of health care workers have children which suddenly are at home and need to be supervised, pulling these workers out of their duties. I suppose its ok early on, but seems problematic if enough people eventually get infected. Understood that schools a…
Well, let’s think about what might happen: people still need to work, and children want to play. Hey let’s meet all at one parent’s home today and tomorrow at the next... I really doubt it is as effective as many think unless there is a general lock down and people are expected not to visit other people.
Something that I heard from an epidemiologist the other day is how shutting down schools and daycares can be incredibly counterproductive, because such a high percentage of health care workers have children which suddenly are at home and need to be supervised, pulling these workers out of their duties. I suppose its ok early on, but seems problematic if enough people eventually get infected. Understood that schools a…
Probably best to shut them down too early or not at all. Grandparents tend to be relied upon as babysitters in time of need, so if you wait until transmission among school children is widespread your actions just delivered the virus to some of the most vulnerable populations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is what lethal ignorance looks like.
0.5% lethal according to the latest stats — or 99.5% non-lethal for you optimists out there.
Rationally, you pretty confident that you won't die? Sure. But what behavior changes are you willing to tolerate not to have to take the chance? I sure wouldn't take the bet on a lark, even though the expectation is that I live.
Now think about extending that same game to your family and friends, to the school down the street, to the shopping mall, and to the elder's home in town. Some people are going to roll 0, and there's a real risk that some of those people are people you know and care about. And even if they're not, your community will still be dramatically affected. It could be your car mechanic, your office's custodial staff, or the greybeard in your office who knows how to decipher the old FORTRAN code.
I'm not willing to be flippant about that. Even 1 in 200 people can be devastating emotional, logistical, and financial toll on a community. I'm not saying panic, but I don't think it's smart or responsible to downplay the risks of infection in a disease that is currently spreading exponentially (or, at least, maintains a positive growth ratio.) Canceling gatherings, temporarily closing schools, working from home, etc.--these are all inconvenient, they make our lives and business harder, they're having a negative financial impact. But they're also totally the reasonable course of action in the face of a pretty serious threat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is what lethal ignorance looks like.
0.5% lethal according to the latest stats — or 99.5% non-lethal for you optimists out there.
I don't consider it acceptable to sacrifice 3% of the population in one fell swoop, to avoid short-term economic damage. Or even a fraction of that. It's abhorrent. Please walk me through the moral reasoning if this is your stance.
By the way, someone getting very, very sad because their quite healthy loved parent died a decade too early, is also economic damage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Until there's a vaccine this is all "flattening the curve" trying to limit the overall number of severely sick individuals to a level that they can get hospital care.
No country is quarantining itself for 12-18 months
Note. They are still aiming to keep the private sector running.