The Coronavirus Thread

[NineBerry]

I have a video that exposes Project Veritas as alien fraudsters. But I can't link to it. They would shut down this forum if I did

[Cunt]

If you have reached a state where you have a low number of infections, the ability to test and trace and a very little number of idiots in the country, you can continue until a vaccine is available without too many restrictions on the economy and individual freedoms and with a low number of new infections. It's basically what South Korea is doing since the beginning and what some European countries like Germany, the Czech Republic, Greece and others may be able to do in the near future.

When should Cuomo open New York, without being a murderous bastard?

How much is a human life worth, in dollars? He said 'priceless' (lol)

How much is an economic shutdown going to cost, in 'priceless' human lives? (suicide, financial ruin, avoiding medical care etc.)

Very few people are willing to examine honestly the value of the lives, or the shutdown. All buzzwords and feel-good phrases.

I trust information a bit better, when it isn't 'pretty'. Like finding out that the economic shutdown results in more suicide, domestic violence, child abuse, and screen time.

So the cost of the shutdown, is not just human lives, but despondence leading to death, battered women, damaged children and more YouTube...

Shit subject, but honesty will look pretty ugly, no matter who says it.

[Brian Peacock]

If you have reached a state where you have a low number of infections, the ability to test and trace and a very little number of idiots in the country, you can continue until a vaccine is available without too many restrictions on the economy and individual freedoms and with a low number of new infections. It's basically what South Korea is doing since the beginning and what some European countries like Germany, the Czech Republic, Greece and others may be able to do in the near future.

Or you could just blame China.

[laklak]

Cuomo will keep New York shut and then demand the rest of us pay for it.

[Cunt]

Cuomo (and most of them) fear certain deaths more than others.

This may affect their decisions.

(to a politician, triage deaths can be MUCH more damaging than virus deaths)

[Brian Peacock]

Banksy, 'game changer' ...

[NineBerry]

How much is an economic shutdown going to cost, in 'priceless' human lives? (suicide, financial ruin, avoiding medical care etc.)

If you don't get the virus under control, the same damage will most likely be done multiple times over because of a crash of the system.

[Cunt]

How much is an economic shutdown going to cost, in 'priceless' human lives? (suicide, financial ruin, avoiding medical care etc.)

If you don't get the virus under control

I'm assuming you aren't suggesting that 'I' need to get it under control. First off, I refuse. Second, (more importantly) I am unable.

If YOU likewise can't, then we are left with an out-of-control virus. Until a vaccine is found.

Or everyone will get it.

See, there is almost no hiding from this, it sounds like. We can lockdown forever, and reduce it's spread, but it is VERY easy to spread.

, the same damage will most likely be done multiple times over because of a crash of the system.

Are you going to pretend that the system won't crash due to lockdown?

Or is the only crash that matters the virus one? If you don't recognize the importance of the economy, I don't know how to even talk about this with you.

Maybe you should start with how many lives are worth spending on this, then decide which way costs the least number (lockdown vs some other method)

[NineBerry]

The system won't crash due to lockdown if 1) you are willing to put in a lot of money and 2) have a consistent strategy to keep the lockdown strict and long enough so that you can then afterwards open widely when the virus is under control.

It's like with a bridge that is old and needs maintenance. To do maintenance you have to close the bridge for a few weeks. Lots of trouble for people who need to cross the bridge. But if you don't invest the money and endure that trouble, some time later the bridge will collapse unplanned and people will not be able to use it for a much longer time.

[NineBerry]

If YOU likewise can't, then we are left with an out-of-control virus. Until a vaccine is found.

Or everyone will get it.

See, there is almost no hiding from this, it sounds like. We can lockdown forever, and reduce it's spread, but it is VERY easy to spread.

It's possible. Look at South Korea. They test a lot and only have less than ten cases every day for more than two weeks already. And no big restrictions on the economy most of the time.

Germany, Czech Republic, Greece could reach the same state withing a couple of weeks.

[Tero]

We need that socialism so you can afford to stay home or to be sick.

[Cunt]

The system won't crash due to lockdown if 1) you are willing to put in a lot of money and 2) have a consistent strategy to keep the lockdown strict and long enough so that you can then afterwards open widely when the virus is under control.

It's like with a bridge that is old and needs maintenance. To do maintenance you have to close the bridge for a few weeks. Lots of trouble for people who need to cross the bridge. But if you don't invest the money and endure that trouble, some time later the bridge will collapse unplanned and people will not be able to use it for a much longer time.

If the people need to cross that bridge to eat, then you can't ignore those you are starving out while fixing the bridge for the rest.

I don't disagree that this virus will kill, but it sounds like you aren't fairly acknowledging the 'economic shutdown' deaths against the 'covid infection' deaths.

How many suicides and from ruined family businesses before you can acknowledge both kinds of deaths? Everyone seems to be firmly on one side of this, when the available data doesn't seem to support either extreme.

[NineBerry]

First, the data suggests that fewer people die in economic trouble. This seems counterintuitive, but that's reality.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00210-0

Secondly, you don't acknowledge that there will be a much harsher economic trouble when the virus goes uncontrolled.

Thirdly, there's also deaths avoided by the shutdown besides the deaths from the virus. Traffic deaths, crime, ...

[Cunt]

First, the data suggests that fewer people die in economic trouble. This seems counterintuitive, but that's reality.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00210-0

Secondly, you don't acknowledge that there will be a much harsher economic trouble when the virus goes uncontrolled.

Thirdly, there's also deaths avoided by the shutdown besides the deaths from the virus. Traffic deaths, crime, ...

First, the data isn't in yet. Since that is absolutely true, I can ignore your linky to a nature blog.

Maybe it's as trustworthy as the WHO, but it's still too early to say if Sweden, Japan, S. Korea or Iran had the best approach and results.

One thing that continues to astound me, is that everyone is talking about 'trusted professionals', but many of them have been caught being fucking idiots.

We can't know what information is good yet, but can't we at least start dismissing the shitty stuff?

[NineBerry]

The nature article is from 2019