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

91–100 of 436 posts

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

#91

Post by benmmurphy »

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.

Another way of thinking about it is that there are other non-coronavirus interventions you can perform that will convert money into lives. if you spend money performing coronavirus interventions then you retard your ability to perform these other interventions that might be more efficient at converting money into lives.

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

#93

Post by the8472 »

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.

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

#94

Post by antepodius »

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.

Just give some money to an old person, then.

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

#95

Post by scarmig »

At this point, the writing for the USA is on the wall: either institute a national quarantine policy, or face a mass die off of hundreds of thousands of the elderly in the next couple months.

We need to start the national quarantine before things blow up to Italy and Wuhan level proportions. Yes, it will be extremely costly. But riding on imaginary hopes that the virus will just disappear for no real reason is extraordinarily irresponsible.

The details of what it looks like will take time to figure out--it will be a complicated collaboration between the federal, state, and local authorities, with the justice system and health sectors being deeply involved. That's reason to start figuring those details out now, and not two weeks from now.

Donald Trump was elected because he said he was a risk taker willing to do what needs to be done despite criticism from everyone. A national quarantine is needed now, and we need bold action to get it started. This is his moment to make a difference.

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

#96

Post by KarlKemp »

exegete wrote: post #18
izacus wrote: post #7

Or perhaps our government is acting and handling the threat, just not in a way mass hysteria on Twitter demands. Knee jerk reaction usually ends up in theater, not proper containment. (Then again, my government isn't the Belgian government.)

So to you would consider what’s been done so far by the US federal government not theater?

There are countries besides Belgium and the US (thank God!). Sou5 Korea seems to be doing ok, Italy is certainly doing the right things, even China did pretty well, especially considering they didn’t get advanced warning.

In the US, a lot of the action is at the state level, and WA, for example, seems to be doing fine.

The federal response, and especially the testing situation, is complete amateur-hour bordering on negligence-in-the-criminal-sense, yes.

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

#97

Post by gjulianm »

mostafab wrote: post #67
nextstep wrote: post #25

I think HN should enact stronger Coronavirus-related moderation like Reddit has. This is a bad post from a software engineer (not a health professional) and it offers an amateur analysis without even providing a real suggestion. What benefit does this provide in a crisis?

posts from health professionals can be even worse. this one was not too bad at explaining the thinking of ruling elites (who think they can fine-tune an epidemic)

Not too bad? This is a post from a guy who, from his Twitter, "has been thinking for the last few days" and somehow he knows the thinking of ruling elites?

Honestly, I am really surprised that this post is being upvoted at all. Empty speculation for no reason at all.

It's also very wrong, as it depends on what measures are required for each curve, and as it seems clear, this guy does not seem to know the possible measures at hand, their feasibility and effectiveness.

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

#98

Post by yardie »

rorykoehler wrote: post #73
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…

you will never know if it worked or not though. 4a & 2 look the same after the fact

After Y2K I tried to raise this point that all the work did pay off. I guess people were expecting a control case somewhere, like a random power station in the middle of nowhere crashing, to show what happens if a system remained unpatched. After a while, I started to doubt myself as well. Even going to "Y2k was a hoax", for a brief period. But talking to more programmers from that period snapped me out of it.

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

#99

Post by JoshTko »

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…

This is exactly why we will also take no action on climate change.

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

#100

Post by DennisP »

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.

Unless there are other countries that had more serious problems.
Post reply on HN