New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough • Hacker News Board

Re: New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough

#21

Post by chinathrow » Sat, Mar 28, 2020, 3:52 PM UTC

jariel wrote: post #19

This is terrible thinking: South Korea and other places have not locked down and they have effectively contained the virus. We are doing Trillions of damage they are avoiding. Given the costs we should be spending billions studying what they are doing. We need to understand more effectively how the virus is spreading and focus on those spots, not this lockdown stuff which is too costly. Some basic policies like mask-…

From the article: HK did in fact not effectively contain the virus.

"In recent days, this semblance of normalcy has vanished. The number of confirmed cases here has ticked upward at a much quicker pace than before, worrying health experts. The government reversed course on its easing of restrictions, sending workers back home, closing parks and city facilities, and reiterating calls for social distancing."

Re: New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough

#22

Post by jariel » Sat, Mar 28, 2020, 3:55 PM UTC

chinathrow wrote: post #21

jariel wrote: post #19

This is terrible thinking: South Korea and other places have not locked down and they have effectively contained the virus. We are doing Trillions of damage they are avoiding. Given the costs we should be spending billions studying what they are doing. We need to understand more effectively how the virus is spreading and focus on those spots, not this lockdown stuff which is too costly. Some basic policies like mask-…

From the article: HK did in fact not effectively contain the virus. "In recent days, this semblance of normalcy has vanished. The number of confirmed cases here has ticked upward at a much quicker pace than before, worrying health experts. The government reversed course on its easing of restrictions, sending workers back home, closing parks and city facilities, and reiterating calls for social distancing."

Sorry, I meant to wite South Korea.

Re: New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough

#23

Post by dpcan » Sat, Mar 28, 2020, 3:55 PM UTC

jariel wrote: post #19

This is terrible thinking: South Korea and other places have not locked down and they have effectively contained the virus. We are doing Trillions of damage they are avoiding. Given the costs we should be spending billions studying what they are doing. We need to understand more effectively how the virus is spreading and focus on those spots, not this lockdown stuff which is too costly. Some basic policies like mask-…

I agree, there's something much bigger at play here. They've been telling us NOT to wear masks.

Why not put everyone in masks and gloves instead?

Re: New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough

#24

Post by danharaj » Sat, Mar 28, 2020, 3:56 PM UTC

DenisM wrote: post #16

empath75 wrote: post #2

Successive lockdowns and easings are probably going to continue for up to two years. Anybody arguing that the stock market or the economy is going to bounce back quickly in the next two months are either bullshitting you or deluding themselves. No “stimulus” package is going to be effective, because you can’t use spending to stimulate an economy which has been forced to stop producing goods and services. All you will…

>either bullshitting you or deluding themselves Was this the best possible way to treat an intellectual disagreement? Surely people can disagree with you without being liars or delusionary? Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Surely people can tell you the Earth is flat without being delusional or a liar.

At some point, when the stakes are so high, willful ignorance is harmful and should be called out.

Re: New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough

#25

Post by frosted-flakes » Sat, Mar 28, 2020, 3:57 PM UTC

vladd wrote: post #9

empath75 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll just give one example of how things will change — massive amounts of women are going to leave the workforce. Schools and day cares are not going to be reliable for the foreseeable future and women are more likely to quit their jobs and stay home if that becomes necessary.

There are significant second order effects (and 3rd, 4th degree effects and so on) that are difficult to foresee and accurately simulate. For example, just to continue on your train of thoughts, the number of average children in existing young families is going to go up, which is going to increase food consumption and, potentially decades later, construction activities in real estate.

Why would young families suddenly have more children?

Re: New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough

#26

Post by jds375 » Sat, Mar 28, 2020, 3:58 PM UTC

dpcan wrote: post #23

jariel wrote: post #19

This is terrible thinking: South Korea and other places have not locked down and they have effectively contained the virus. We are doing Trillions of damage they are avoiding. Given the costs we should be spending billions studying what they are doing. We need to understand more effectively how the virus is spreading and focus on those spots, not this lockdown stuff which is too costly. Some basic policies like mask-…

I agree, there's something much bigger at play here. They've been telling us NOT to wear masks. Why not put everyone in masks and gloves instead?

There’s nothing bigger at play. The reasoning is obvious. It’s because there are not enough masks available and it’s more important that healthcare workers get them right now than the general public.

Once healthcare workers are covered, then we can make sure everyone else starts wearing them.

Re: New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough

#27

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Mar 28, 2020, 3:58 PM UTC

IgorPartola wrote: post #4

empath75 wrote: post #2

Successive lockdowns and easings are probably going to continue for up to two years. Anybody arguing that the stock market or the economy is going to bounce back quickly in the next two months are either bullshitting you or deluding themselves. No “stimulus” package is going to be effective, because you can’t use spending to stimulate an economy which has been forced to stop producing goods and services. All you will…

/r/Wallstreetbets just had someone put $775k, the person’s entire net worth, into options on the idea that the market will crash by 6/19. I am sure comments like yours give them hope that they are right. Personally, I think that the economy will change significantly, but crash vs recover for markets is different. If suddenly workers got a fair wage and everyone got universal healthcare we could easily see the country…

[deleted]

Re: New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough

#28

Post by chiefalchemist » Sat, Mar 28, 2020, 4:01 PM UTC

But of course. If you intentionally prevent ppl from being infected then they remain susceptible. Short of a vaccine, you can't put it off forever. Those ppl can't hide forever.

This is an expected - or should be - result of "flatten the curve." FTC is not about the virus per se, it's about the healthcare system. That is, to not exceed the volume the healthcare system can handle.

Put another way, an increase in the number of positives isn't necessarily a bad thing. If if stays towards the 80% who are asymptomatic or low risk then the more the better. They'll get it. Recovery and will be past it. The key number - the number the media should be emphasizing - is the positives in high risk individuals. That's the curve we don't want to see spike.

Furthermore, it's where those happen. One-thousand as 50 in 20 cities is not the same as 500 in one city (e.g., NYC) and the other 500 distributed evenly elsewhere.

The aggregate numbers make great - but crap - headlines. The understanding is in the details.

Re: New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough

#29

Post by jariel » Sat, Mar 28, 2020, 4:01 PM UTC

dpcan wrote: post #23

jariel wrote: post #19

This is terrible thinking: South Korea and other places have not locked down and they have effectively contained the virus. We are doing Trillions of damage they are avoiding. Given the costs we should be spending billions studying what they are doing. We need to understand more effectively how the virus is spreading and focus on those spots, not this lockdown stuff which is too costly. Some basic policies like mask-…

I agree, there's something much bigger at play here. They've been telling us NOT to wear masks. Why not put everyone in masks and gloves instead?

The reason they've been telling us not to wear masks is a little tricky: they don't want us to buy N95s in lieu of having them go to medical staff.

From the BBC:

"Disposable surgical masks also are not recommended for people unless they're sick or caring for someone who's ill."

Well, if it helps someone caring for someone who's ill, obviously it will help a random person no? I suppose the issue is the degree of effectiveness, how it is used, and I've read that wearing a mask makes people otherwise too confident and lax in other things aks washing hands.

If Korea can do it, we can do it, whatever 'it' is it's not magic.

Re: New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough

#30

Post by tomatocracy » Sat, Mar 28, 2020, 4:02 PM UTC

The political acceptability of releasing then locking down again is likely to be very low in my view.

Friends and colleagues I speak to who haven’t followed the modelling papers etc think the point of a lockdown is to eliminate the virus entirely - not contain, not delay but eliminate entirely. There is also a very strong fear of getting the virus (many of the same people are convinced that it’s a death sentence almost akin to Ebola). I suspect that these views are very widespread and this is why the lockdowns currently enjoy strong popular support.

A release followed by a second lockdown would, I think, be viewed as an admission that the policy was a failure therefore and would also lead to a reassessment of how dangerous it really is amongst those people. Those still suffering from the economic damage from the first (which will be almost everyone) will have a lot of reasons to resist very hard and I think most governments in democratic countries would struggle to implement such a policy.