Coronavirus (COVID-19) is too exciting for adults to discuss (CLOSED)

[AKAK]

Until today, I was understanding of all the measures being taken so far, to 'flatten the curve' and contain the spread of the virus, and lessen its impact on the healthcare system. But today I've decided that they need to place an end-point in people's minds about these measures. I think most folks can deal with a 3-week period of harsh stay-at-home measures, maybe 30 days. But what if there's no end in sight to the the measures that are having such a drastic effect on the economy? Do the health experts calling the shots think we need to wait 4 to 6 weeks before deciding if we need to continue these measures for another 4 to 6 weeks after that? And then maybe even longer after that? People need to be able to make decisions about their lives and their jobs, and the future of their businesses, and they need an end date to these isolation measures in order to do that.

I've known this was coming since early January, when it was spreading rapidly in Wuhan. I thought the response was too slow for several weeks, and in the last week I've seen the pendulum swing to these harsh measures and have understood the reasons why, but there needs to be a definite end in sight. The impact on the economy and society will be worse overall than the effects of the virus on the population if the current situation extends past April.

And I'm not saying this because of the stock market, I have zero money in there. I'm saying it because of the impact to millions of people that will have serious difficulty in making monthly payments and simply buying food if this lasts more than a few weeks. And I have serious doubt that any government aid package will be done effectively.

And I'm in an above average risk category, health-wise. But I'm willing to be exposed and take my 1% or so, or whatever it actually is, risk at not surviving, rather than have life as we know it devolve into the mass chaos that will likely occur if the current situation extends into months.

Dewine started throwing around May 1 as a decision point timeline today. Presented as an educated guess, but I suspect its partly because of what you lay out here.

 

[Thump]

Once someone recovers from Covid-19, can they still pass it on to others?

 

[sparcboxbuck]

I did venture out today... a little bit after 9:00 AM to the local Jewel (grocery store).

As advertised, no TP and milk was getting fairly thin, but still had plenty from what I could tell.

Town is a bit desolate. A little depressing. I’m going to venture out again and check a local mom and pop Asian grocery down the road to see if @ORD_Buckeye’s observations apply to Wheaton.

 

[AKAK]

Once someone recovers from Covid-19, can they still pass it on to others?

Problem in the trunk?

 

[sparcboxbuck]

I’m thinking there’s a baby boom in 9-12 months.

I was thinking this the other day as well. The providers are all going to be up in arms about having no beds again.

 

[Jake]

I say it’s 50/50 we have a football season at this point.

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

and if everything is about health then what about the health of this huge swath of Americans?

We may lose 2.2MM lives in the "do nothing" scenario but we are causing long term damage to 70 times that number in the form of depression and anxiety/mental health issues related to the economic dislocation. Studies of this have been done. There is a link to poverty and shorter life spans, higher cancer rates, stomach issues etc. These people essentially die from the stress.

I'm absolutely 110% playing devil's advocate here, so bear that in mind with any responses

Why does it take a global pandemic to recognize that being really poor truly fucking sucks? People live this life all the time not knowing how they are going to pay the bills and nobody gives a fuck about the harm to their health then. Why does it matter now? Because middle class people living paycheck-to-paycheck might find out what it's like to be really poor?

[/devil's advocate]

I come back to what my grandfather thought about the great depression -- What's the big deal? We never had anything anyways, so this doesn't hurt me at all.

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

Wife has been working from home for 15+ years and I’ve been doing the same (with a brief intermission) for about six. The commute from coffee maker to my desk is the best.

I pick up at least two hours a day by not going into the office. Sometimes that’s my time... sometimes I give it to the company. But either way, eliminating the hassle of having to get up and out has been wonderful. Most of my team is home based and we’ve been doing it for years. Once you make the jump... you may never want to go back. Frankly, the kind of money it would take to pull me into an office to do the same job would likely price me out of the market all things considered.

I still have a 50 mile roundtrip drive, but even this morning, with part of 70E being shutdown right in the middle of downtown Columbus, it still only took me 30 minutes to get in.

 

[AKAK]

Here is your herd immunity.

 

[ScriptOhio]

OK, which PSA is better?

 

[Jaxbuck]

I'm absolutely 110% playing devil's advocate here, so bear that in mind with any responses

Why does it take a global pandemic to recognize that being really poor truly fucking sucks? People live this life all the time not knowing how they are going to pay the bills and nobody gives a fuck about the harm to their health then. Why does it matter now? Because middle class people living paycheck-to-paycheck might find out what it's like to be really poor?

[/devil's advocate]

I come back to what my grandfather thought about the great depression -- What's the big deal? We never had anything anyways, so this doesn't hurt me at all.

It's not about middle class vs poor (at least in my mind). It's about taking unemployment from 3.5% to possibly 20 something %.

They have decided to intentionally do economic, mental and physical harm to a larger number of Americans than the virus would have killed if left to run its course. They have committed this intentional act with no tangible proof that their actions would deliver the desired result or save any lives.

They did it so they could not be accused of "doing nothing" and looking bad on social media in the fall. They probably assume that the bankrupted folks won't hold them (the elected officials) accountable for their panicked and poorly thought out decisions.

 

[ExpatAkronite]

Here is your herd immunity.

Gotta fight for the right to party, eh? That's about the only "civil/uncivil war" I see happening in this country.

 

[Jagdaddy]

and if everything is about health then what about the health of this huge swath of Americans?

We may lose 2.2MM lives in the "do nothing" scenario but we are causing long term damage to 70 times that number in the form of depression and anxiety/mental health issues related to the economic dislocation. Studies of this have been done. There is a link to poverty and shorter life spans, higher cancer rates, stomach issues etc. These people essentially die from the stress.

The cure being worse than the disease is a real thing. Read that Imperial college document. There is enough in there to absolutely make the case for the do nothing (or at least a hell of a lot less than this) option.

Too late now, horse is out of the barn but there will be civil fucking war if this goes on for anything approaching months. It's simply untenable.

I don't know that it's "too late now", but I agree that months is untenable. What you describe in terms of economics-related maladies has, of course, already been happening throughout the country before this virus came around, and not even just among the poor, but quite a bit farther up the ladder than that. Perhaps a benefit of the cure being worse than the disease will be real serious citizen focus, not just from "progressive" politicians seeking votes, but from the quite financially comfortable and not terribly willing to become even a little bit less so (extensive virtue signalling by many notwithstanding) professional/knowledge economy classes on the extent to which our current level of crony capitalism fucks most people.

As for the specific steps that have been taken to this point, I think that there were no great options and that, given the available information, the path taken has been reasonable. Communication from top leaders, however, has generally been poor in that the concerns you have raised should have been, and still should be, explicitly addressed and explanation should be given that "do nothing" was considered and for reasons X, Y, and Z not deemed to be the best option (yet). That's hard to do in the current media environment of sensationalizing everything and with the polarization between both increasingly radical political parties that profit from a fear-based environment and the "every human life is worth infinity" and "this is just the common cold" crowds.

 

[buckeyebri]

I'm doing this while also maintaining the proper social distancing of 6 feet.

I just hope my wife doesn't look over this way.

That’s really not a new norm now is it.....at least it wouldn’t be here

 

[Jaxbuck]

I don't know that it's "too late now", but I agree that months is untenable. What you describe in terms of economics-related maladies has, of course, already been happening throughout the country before this virus came around, and not even just among the poor, but quite a bit farther up the ladder than that. Perhaps a benefit of the cure being worse than the disease will be real serious citizen focus, not just from "progressive" politicians seeking votes, but from the quite financially comfortable and not terribly willing to become even a little bit less so (extensive virtue signalling by many notwithstanding) professional/knowledge economy classes on the extent to which our current level of crony capitalism fucks most people.

As for the specific steps that have been taken to this point, I think that there were no great options and that, given the available information, the path taken has been reasonable. Communication from top leaders, however, has generally been poor in that the concerns you have raised should have been, and still should be, explicitly addressed and explanation should be given that "do nothing" was considered and for reasons X, Y, and Z not deemed to be the best option (yet). That's hard to do in the current media environment of sensationalizing everything and with the polarization between both increasingly radical political parties that profit from a fear-based environment and the "every human life is worth infinity" and "this is just the common cold" crowds.

well said

and for the record, I'm not saying "do nothing" option was the correct path or will be the correct path. It's a brutal mother of a decision but as you said, the communication of it now that we have a glimpse into what they were using to frame their decision from, was unsurprisingly awful. All leaders, all levels, both parties.