Fed cuts half point in emergency move amid spreading virus • Hacker News Board

Re: Fed cuts half point in emergency move amid spreading virus

#461

Post by fauigerzigerk » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 9:01 PM UTC

gdubs wrote: post #452

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Aren’t the hospitalization rates something like ~20% according to the main study that came out of China? Yes, but the reason why the Diamond Princess is interesting is that we know exactly how many of them got infected. We don't know that about any other population.

The diamond princess is... interesting, yes, but an unmitigated disaster is how most experts have defined it. It’s unclear we can extract meaningful info applicable to the rest of the world based on the cruise ship. Also consider my point that many, many of these cases are unresolved. Whereas the China study, which most health experts are relying on currently as our best guess - not the cruise ship — looks at resolve…

I said myself that I didn't believe the cruise ship numbers were representative, but the 20% figure you cite isn't a realistic hospitalisation rate either as it only includes diagnosed cases.

The number of undiagnosed cases is the great unknown that experts disagree on. It's also the basis for all the wild speculation out there.

Under normal circumstances I would say let's test a random sample of the population in some affected area. But as test kits are scarce doing that would probably be ill advised.

Re: Fed cuts half point in emergency move amid spreading virus

#462

Post by nybble41 » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 9:02 PM UTC

RobertoG wrote: post #240

bluedevil2k wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it ironic that the people who say "the government should just spend tons of money because the debt doesn't matter" and don't care about punting the problem to the next generation are the same ones who say how irresponsible the Baby Boomers are for punting the environment problem to the next generation.

The "passing the problem to the next generation" thing doesn't make any sense. There are two possibilities: If in 25 years there wil be enough real resources (machines, infrastructure, knowledge..) for covering all the needs of the people, the accumulate debt is not going to be a problem. If in 25 years there will not be enough real resources, the government finances are going to be irrelevant. So, what is the best w…

> If in 25 years there wil be enough real resources (machines, infrastructure, knowledge..) for covering all the needs of the people, the accumulate debt is not going to be a problem.

Unless, you know, there are enough goods to support a lifestyle similar to that of the current generation but our kids can't buy them because all their productivity is going to pay the interest on our generation's (foreign-owned) debt. Or there would have been enough goods but we took that money we borrowed and used it to shift production toward things we want now, compromising the capital investment and maintenance which were needed to stay productive so that everyone's needs could be covered in the future.

Profitable investment is good, and it isn't necessarily wrong to go in debt to fund a good investment, but there is such a thing as malinvestment—investing in the wrong things, resulting in a net loss—and the more debt you take on the more your productivity is continually drained away and unavailable for either investment or consumption. Profitable investments will take place without subsidies, and if it isn't clear which kinds of investment will end up being profitable then it's better to save the funds until the situation becomes clearer rather than waste scarce goods and labor on a bad investment.

Re: Fed cuts half point in emergency move amid spreading virus

#463

Post by hurricanetc » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 9:02 PM UTC

kickopotomus wrote: post #455

hurricanetc wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your links don't say what you think they say. Did you even read them? It's mostly ambiguous language and uncertainty. We think this, it's not certain that. It changes day to day. Case in point the incubation period from your own link. "Most estimates of the incubation period range from 1-14 days, most commonly around five days. These estimates are updated as more information becomes available." How long does it remai…

Well now you are just being willfully misleading. > Case in point the incubation period from your own link. "Most estimates of the incubation period range from 1-14 days, most commonly around five days. These estimates are updated as more information becomes available." Yes, it continues to become more accurate. Initial reports thought the incubation period could be up to 20-30 days. Continued study of the virus has…

Where you see certainty I see ambiguity. None of what you are reading in those links confirms your forceful statement of facts where no such facts exist.

Re: Fed cuts half point in emergency move amid spreading virus

#464

Post by ericd » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 9:03 PM UTC

learc83 wrote: post #425

ericd wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Boomers remember the 70s, and gold has done extremely well vs USD since then.

But not well vs stocks. Gold still hasn't recovered to it's all time high from ~10 years ago.

It's done ok, it's at about 45x its 1970 price in nominal terms, something like 5x in real. More importantly, as an uncorrelated asset to help buffer against crises in a portfolio strategy, it's actually done very well. I'm certainly not advocating that anyone go 100% gold, but it gets hated on more than it deserves.

Re: Fed cuts half point in emergency move amid spreading virus

#465

Post by treis » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 9:12 PM UTC

gdubs wrote: post #454

learc83 wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't have any idea what the hospitalization rates are. We only know what the hospitalization rates are for people who have a confirmed diagnosis, which skews towards people with severe symptoms. >Also, the cruise ship cases aren’t all resolved outcomes yet. No they aren't, but the vast majority have been symptomatic longer than the average time till hospitalization and the number in critical condition hasn't incr…

Except we do have data, that’s my point. China’s study is being cited by most experts as this situation unfolds. It doesn’t mean these numbers will hold — it’s possible that what we see out of South Korea over the coming month might be more representative — but it’s what we have, and it’s not nothing: http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/02/study-720...

Lots of people on the ship that tested positive showed little to no symptoms. It's very likely that there are a large number of infections that have gone undetected. Until we test everyone we won't know the true number.

Re: Fed cuts half point in emergency move amid spreading virus

#466

Post by nostrademons » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 9:14 PM UTC

ethbro wrote: post #286

yumraj wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And, if they try to ramp up the production too quickly, will we see a return of Covid-19 due to people in close proximity again?

Not if a substantial number of them now have antibodies against it. More realistically, even if enough of them have antibodies to create herd immunity. (Via making it impractical for the virus to transmit to a vulnerable host)

The fraction of people needed to create herd immunity in a population is 1 - 1 / R0. With R0 at 4-7, that means about 75-86% of people within the population need to have COVID-19 antibodies before transmission naturally dies out through herd immunity. With current case numbers, China doesn't have anywhere close to this many cases - it would imply ~1B infections within the country rather than the ~80K that have been found so far, off by a factor of 10,000.

I think a likely outcome is that the current outbreak dies down, then it either flares up again from some undetected cases or is reintroduced from another country. But then, with the initial media attention elsewhere and COVID-19 symptoms basically looking like the flu, they'll just let the sick die rather than re-introduce draconian quarantine measures.

Re: Fed cuts half point in emergency move amid spreading virus

#467

Post by kickopotomus » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 9:15 PM UTC

hurricanetc wrote: post #463

kickopotomus wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well now you are just being willfully misleading. > Case in point the incubation period from your own link. "Most estimates of the incubation period range from 1-14 days, most commonly around five days. These estimates are updated as more information becomes available." Yes, it continues to become more accurate. Initial reports thought the incubation period could be up to 20-30 days. Continued study of the virus has…

Where you see certainty I see ambiguity. None of what you are reading in those links confirms your forceful statement of facts where no such facts exist.

Nothing about any of the posted information is ambiguous. On the other hand, you decided to extract partial quotes that fit your narrative in a way to be purposefully deceptive.

Researchers saying "we are not completely certain but the evidence appears to indicate X" is not logically equivalent to "we have no idea why X happens"

Re: Fed cuts half point in emergency move amid spreading virus

#468

Post by gdubs » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 9:28 PM UTC

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #461

gdubs wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The diamond princess is... interesting, yes, but an unmitigated disaster is how most experts have defined it. It’s unclear we can extract meaningful info applicable to the rest of the world based on the cruise ship. Also consider my point that many, many of these cases are unresolved. Whereas the China study, which most health experts are relying on currently as our best guess - not the cruise ship — looks at resolve…

I said myself that I didn't believe the cruise ship numbers were representative, but the 20% figure you cite isn't a realistic hospitalisation rate either as it only includes diagnosed cases. The number of undiagnosed cases is the great unknown that experts disagree on. It's also the basis for all the wild speculation out there. Under normal circumstances I would say let's test a random sample of the population in so…

The same is true for the flu. People get it every year but they don’t go and get swabbed.

I also agree that there’s a wide range of possibility. But I’m responding to the claim there’s no data with a study from China’s CDC that most experts are citing as the best info we have right now. Is it perfect? No. But the Diamond Princess isn’t a scientific study — it’s a mess.

Edit: for a range of possible outcomes, this article is helpful:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2020/02/25/coronaviru...

At the low end are South Korea’s (mortality) numbers, at the extreme high Iran, and Italy aligning roughly with China’s study.

The tl;dr is we have a fairly wide range of possible outcomes, but Italy is lining up with China’s findings.

Re: Fed cuts half point in emergency move amid spreading virus

#469

Post by jjoonathan » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 9:34 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #322

jjoonathan wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like the Judiciary is independent of the Executive and provides a check and balance to its power?

Actually, yes. The judiciary does provide a check to executive power - just not as often as the press tells you it should.

I didn't buy that in grade school civics and I buy it even less today.

No enforcement authority = no authority. It's really that simple. Strongly worded letters are pointless in a world where someone can hold them up, shout "Complete Exoneration!", and have their media apparatus repeat it until their followers believe it.

Re: Fed cuts half point in emergency move amid spreading virus

#470

Post by ars » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 9:43 PM UTC

standardUser wrote: post #63

pastor_elm wrote: post #8

>The Fed also said in the statement that the “fundamentals of the U.S. economy remain strong.” So why cut the rate? Doesn't make any sense.

Bowing to pressure from King Trump. Edit: Trump has loudly and consistently attacked the Federal Reserve for scheming against him and trying to sabotage the economy, something completely unprecedented considering the Fed is famously intended to be independent. He ratcheted up these complaints even further since the outbreak of Convid-19. Then, the Fed takes the unusual step of cutting rates between sessions (for the…

Trump attacks all sorts of things. If people do things it's not always a result of him.