We're not really going to be able to return to a robust economy until we get control of the virus, and at 50,000 cases a day it's spreading like wildfire throughout the country. So unfortunately, yes, a lockdown for six weeks would impose short term pain, but I believe we as a country can afford to support Americans through that short term lockdown so then we can reopen and have a vigorous economy, have kids returning to school.
I want us to get back to a robust economy as quickly as possible. This is much faster than allowing the virus to spread uncontrolled.

I assume he's already handed in his resignation.

Too late now, that needed to happen right away. We wasted our opportunity with our half-assed shutdown. We are stuck on the path we are on, like it or not.

---

C(-)ris
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Throwback Thursday Signature:

YOU CANT MAKE ME WEAR A MASK!

Regional Fed presidents don't get forced out, at least not by the likes of Trump.

Quote
C(-)ris
Too late now, that needed to happen right away. We wasted our opportunity with our half-assed shutdown. We are stuck on the path we are on, like it or not.

Not so. A lockdown of sufficient duration can derail the path of the virus at any time.

The main problem is that it needs to be a nationwide lockdown. Leaving it up to the governors and mayors to decide on a flip of a coin doesn't cut it.

And our legislature needs to guarantee an income for every American during the shutdown so that we can eat.

And because they're not going to be able to provide for everyone according to their needs, we have to have a national moratorium on evictions and foreclosures.

---

Too late now, that needed to happen right away. We wasted our opportunity with our half-assed shutdown. We are stuck on the path we are on, like it or not.

Only if you think it's not going to get worse before it gets better.

The NYTimes is reporting that tens of thousands of students have tested positive during the last two weeks of July. Numbers about this virus are continually under-reported.

Quote
RgrF
...

The NYTimes is reporting that tens of thousands of students have tested positive during the last two weeks of July. Numbers about this virus are continually under-reported.

fake news. We all know that people get tested in 2-3 places and they are reported twice or threes times. The real count is much smaller. It will go away like a miracle one day. We are testing more than any other country in the world.

</sarcasm>

Whatever the best course of action, we're not likely to see it for another 24 weeks.

---

Quote
Sarcany
Whatever the best course of action, we're not likely to see it for another 24 weeks.

Hope he resigns right after the election.

It'll take from election night to inauguration day to sign all the needed pardons.

The original lockdown was to lessen the burden on healthcare providers. how would a complete lockdown lead to a less virulent virus? It would only serve to tell the service workers that everyone but them must stay at home? Has it come to this because people can't wear masks?

Quote
mrbigstuff
The original lockdown was to lessen the burden on healthcare providers. how would a complete lockdown lead to a less virulent virus?

Huh?

It would almost completely put an end to public transmission.

The remaining vectors should be fairly easy to isolate and remediate inside of the first 3-4 weeks. Two more weeks to provide a safety-window followed by a staged re-opening with masks required in every workplace and social distancing and you can easily get the numbers down to the per capita of the average Western European nation.

Quote
mrbigstuff
Has it come to this because people can't wear masks?

I doubt that's the biggest part of it. The states reopened way too soon. People are gathering indoors. With or without masks, that's deadly.

...Opening schools right now is one of the dumbest things ever.

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/09/2020 11:16PM by Sarcany.

Quote
Sarcany

Quote
mrbigstuff
The original lockdown was to lessen the burden on healthcare providers. how would a complete lockdown lead to a less virulent virus?

Huh?

It would almost completely put an end to public transmission.

The remaining vectors should be fairly easy to isolate and remediate inside of the first 3-4 weeks. Two more weeks to provide a safety-window followed by a staged re-opening with masks required in every workplace and social distancing and you can easily get the numbers down to the per capita of the average Western European nation.

We had a lockdown here and people were still dying at a rapid clip. Because the people who are most susceptible were not properly isolated from each other. What will change about that with another complete lockdown?

Quote
mrbigstuff
The original lockdown was to lessen the burden on healthcare providers. how would a complete lockdown lead to a less virulent virus? It would only serve to tell the service workers that everyone but them must stay at home? Has it come to this because people can't wear masks?

ug, it frustrates me to no end that we don't collectively know this. it benefits the incompetence at the top.

low numbers + effective contact tracing = a return to normal with sporadic shutdowns when the virus appears.

but 'common sense' dictates otherwise so we largely pretend nothing is happening.

---

I'm so aggravated that we didn't do this from the jump. I'll bet we'd be dealing with outbreaks here and there but nothing like what we've got now. I fear that we will be living with widespread infection forever at this rate.

---

We had a lockdown here and people were still dying at a rapid clip.

We never ever had a complete nationwide air-tight lock down. You had an early eruption due to the Biogen conference but only noticed after the virus was out of the bag. NY as well.

There was never even close to an air tight national lockdown like New Zealand had.

Well, there's still hope that we will get an effective vaccine in, let's say, one year from today. Maybe even half that time to get started on producing it and inoculating people. Two or three billion injections later and we will begin to have the whole thing under control.

But this isn't going to happen before the November elections, although DT will presumably make some overblown announcement as soon as there are positive results from one of the clinical trials somewhere in the world. Maybe DT and Putin will pretend that the Russian vaccine is just fine.

But yes, a lockdown at the level that Italy did theirs would probably improve things enormously. That's what the fall in the death curve showed the first time around, before the Memorial Day relaxations caused the curve to start going back up. Right now we are steady at 3 deaths per million population per day, meaning about 1000 dead per day. We are not going to get out of this trap while the people are behaving in such a risky fashion; eg: the Sturgis rally this week.

what is the normal death rate per day (without covid)?

and people were still dying at a rapid clip.

Yes and for weeks it would still happen. That’s why a lockdown must outlast the transmission. And then you tack on some extra time to account for the thousands who ignored the first weeks.

6 weeks is a minimum. Italy did 10.

Quote
deckeda
and people were still dying at a rapid clip.

Yes and for weeks it would still happen. That’s why a lockdown must outlast the transmission. And then you tack on some extra time to account for the thousands who ignored the first weeks.

6 weeks is a minimum. Italy did 10.

No doubt it would do some good, but only temporarily. Once things start to occur in any semblance of "normal" again, we would see another spike. How do we plan on *living* with the virus? The only hope from my perspective is masking. We will not eradicate this virus and we cannot afford to keep hurting the most vulnerable by declaring isolation - 62% of the deaths in my state occurred in congregate living facilities like nursing homes, assisted care and VA facilities. Those were preventable, and yet, even under lockdown, they occurred. It's borderline criminal, in my mind, because we *know* who are the most vulnerable and we STILL have done nothing substantial to assist these people. From the Feds all the way down to local officials. it's mind-boggling to me that we cannot see this and figure it out.

There’s no scenario where as a policy overall, not isolating is “worse.” The worldwide evidence is overwhelming, even it contradicts your specific example.

Quote
deckeda
and people were still dying at a rapid clip.

Yes and for weeks it would still happen. That’s why a lockdown must outlast the transmission. And then you tack on some extra time to account for the thousands who ignored the first weeks.

6 weeks is a minimum. Italy did 10.

I like 10 weeks. This should have been national policy beginning at the latest in June but preferably much earlier. Just like New Zealand. Anyway, Pres. Trump blew it and his ego, with the support of the MAGAts, will never allow a shutdown. We’ll have to hope Biden wins big to bring an effective solution to the pandemic.

---

Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.

The Australia data is in after 12 days of hard lockdown around Melbourne, their second-largest city.

It works. They peaked after 7 days in new cases, they have had 5 days of continuous reduction.

But they have rapid and ubiquitous tests that come back same day.

I agree with the Federal Reserve official.

YES, a PROPER lock down should have been done MUCH earlier but, better late than never. Until an EFFECTIVE lock down is put in place, it will be impossible to get Covid19 under control as idiots will keep generating random "hot spots". I for one am NOT holding my breath re a viable vaccine ANYTIME soon (if ever).