Objectively intelligent.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I butchered my post. I meant to refer to the spate of youngish, healthy doctors and nurses exposed to it who have died.

Big tits?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I butchered my post. I meant to refer to the spate of youngish, healthy doctors and nurses exposed to it who have died.

Kinda makes you wonder if repeated exposure is worse, and makes you worry if you're married to an ICU nurse.

eta:

There are now COVID-19 cases around the world, and epidemiological data from tens of thousands of cases. Here’s what we know: no doubt to the relief of parents everywhere, this disease is mild to nonexistent in children. There are almost no pediatric deaths and very few kids even seem to fall sick (though children may still be having clinically barely detectable cases, thus infecting others).

On the other hand, for the elderly or for people who have other diseases or comorbidities, it’s very serious, with death rates reaching up to 15 percent. It’s also a great threat to health workers who handle people with the virus every day, with thousands of cases already. Overall, it appears to have a case fatality rate around 2 percent, which is certainly very serious: seasonal flu, a serious threat in and of itself, has a case fatality rate around 0.1 percent in the United States, so this coronavirus is about 20 times as deadly (though again, this number may get much better or worse depending on the kind of care we can provide).

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...trike-the-u-s/

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Kinda makes you wonder if repeated exposure is worse, and makes you worry if you're married to an ICU nurse.

eta:



https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...trike-the-u-s/

Yeah, its too bad. We need a much higher kill rate to cull the human herd.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Yeah, its too bad. We need a much higher kill rate to cull the human herd.

The bravest lemming is the first to off itself.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

The bravest lemming is the first to off itself.

I'm OK with random chance, whether me, a billionaire or an untouchable in Bangladesh.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I'm OK with random chance, whether me, a billionaire or an untouchable in Bangladesh.

I don't want you to go, you and ggg are the only socks that can tell these others about my live moth poetry.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Yeah, its too bad. We need a much higher kill rate to cull the human herd.

Perhaps a 5X increase in deaths of despair? https://www.spiegel.de/international...9-d872c8f164ac

The idea that if this erupts into a crisis it will topple Trump is interesting. Roubini's historical analysis makes sense on the surface. Crises have taken out a few recent first term presidents.

But Trump's unique electoral path suggests he might buck the trend. The impact of the virus will be felt mostly acutely and immediately in coastal cities Trump has already lost. It appears the impact most likely to harm him politically will be from the stock market continuing to tank and economic activity grinding to a halt. The Rust Belt and flyoverland states where Trump collects the greatest number of Electoral College wins will feel the pain later than the coasts, one would presume. (Investors everywhere will feel it at roughly the same time, but I don't think Trump's supporters are heavily in the market.) The question is how much later does Trumpworld feel the economic pain than than the Blue States on the coasts? I doubt it's beyond the first week of November... but perhaps it could be?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I butchered my post. I meant to refer to the spate of youngish, healthy doctors and nurses exposed to it who have died.

They say one of the first signs is a lot of illogical rambling.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

But Trump's unique electoral path suggests he might buck the trend.

Isn't it the ballgame if Dems win Pennsyltucky? Looks like MI is going to go blue.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

Isn't it the ballgame if Dems win Pennsyltucky? Looks like MI is going to go blue.

Read FB posts from anti-Trumpers saying "I'd never vote for ____, if the Dem nominee." If it is Bernie they may lose a ton of votes to 3rd party or just not voting. If it is not Bernie they may lose a ton of votes to 3rd party or just not voting.

Way too early to call Michigan or any close state.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The impact of the virus will be felt mostly acutely and immediately in coastal cities Trump has already lost. It appears the impact most likely to harm him politically will be from the stock market continuing to tank and economic activity grinding to a halt. The Rust Belt and flyoverland states where Trump collects the greatest number of Electoral College wins will feel the pain later than the coasts, one would presume. (Investors everywhere will feel it at roughly the same time, but I don't think Trump's supporters are heavily in the market.) The question is how much later does Trumpworld feel the economic pain than than the Blue States on the coasts? I doubt it's beyond the first week of November... but perhaps it could be?

A month ago it was Wuhan that was feeling the pain; by last week the streets of Venice and Rome were empty. If a lot of people get sick in coastal cities, a lot of people are going to get sick in the heartland, and it's not going to take very long. As always, I am impressed by your Marxist conviction that politics follows so directly from economics, but this is a case where I think you're missing something. I'm not sure whether the epidemic is going to cause people to rally to authoritarianism or turn them off Trump's particular combination of braggadocio and incompetence, but I think the political impact will be sui generis and not simply a function of pocketbook issues. Though I do think we're going to get a recession out of this, but I wouldn't assume that people will react the way they ordinarily do in a recession.

eta:

One of the problems in the US has been the testing for Covid-19. We haven't been testing many people, in part because we didn't have the capability, and it's a reasonable guess that there are more cases that haven't been found yet because the symptoms are much like flu symptoms and the CDC's protocol about who gets the test (plausibly necessary to keep everyone from asking for tests and overwhelming the function) meant that until quite recently you could have the symptoms but wouldn't get tested unless you had, e.g., traveled to China. In the last day, Pence and the White House (who are now preventing scientists at the CDC from talking to anyone) have stopped reporting the number of tests being done. The White House seems to view this all from a partisan lens, or at least they have found that a useful way to deflect criticism, but I don't think it's going to play well with voters once more people start dying.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

A month ago it was Wuhan that was feeling the pain; by last week the streets of Venice and Rome were empty. If a lot of people get sick in coastal cities, a lot of people are going to get sick in the heartland, and it's not going to take very long. As always, I am impressed by your Marxist conviction that politics follows so directly from economics, but this is a case where I think you're missing something. I'm not sure whether the epidemic is going to cause people to rally to authoritarianism or turn them off Trump's particular combination of braggadocio and incompetence, but I think the political impact will be sui generis and not simply a function of pocketbook issues. Though I do think we're going to get a recession out of this, but I wouldn't assume that people will react the way they ordinarily do in a recession.

I went to Chinatown for soup dumplings yesterday and half the parking lot, a parking lot one usually has to circle at least six or seven times to find a space, was half empty. My yoga studio sent out a message today saying they're pulling all of the props, they're no longer doing hands-on assists, and telling people to stay away if they're not feeling 100% healthy (at the start of allergy season). I've heard rumblings about how SXSW and the Rodeo should be cancelled. I know people delaying buying tickets for trips "just to see what happens before pulling the trigger."

And the only cases in Texas so far are the ones in quarantine from the cruise ship. In a few weeks, if this spreads (and I see no reason why it won't), the hit to the economy is going to be even greater.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

Isn't it the ballgame if Dems win Pennsyltucky? Looks like MI is going to go blue.

I hadn't heard that. And I have no idea which way PA is going to go. Trump voters are less shy this go around, but it's still hard to see any trend.

But I did notice there are far fewer Trump signs in the rural areas than there were in 2016.

There are a fuck ton of bumper stickers, however, and a lot of those transparent decals people put in the back windows of pickups and SUVs.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Read FB posts from anti-Trumpers saying "I'd never vote for ____, if the Dem nominee." If it is Bernie they may lose a ton of votes to 3rd party or just not voting. If it is not Bernie they may lose a ton of votes to 3rd party or just not voting.

Way too early to call Michigan or any close state.

The race on the D side is the same one we had on both sides last time around: Establishment v. Insurgent. The former will vote for the latter, but I don't know about the other way around. It's kind of anathema to the whole idea of insurgency, and that's what Bernie's movement is, to support the corporate moderate candidate. The Establishment types, OTOH, figure anything is better than Trump and that they can neutralize and control Bernie.

If Bernie goes into the convention with a significant delegate lead and Biden wins via use of super delegates, I'd guess Biden can count on losing 1/3-1/2 of would-be Bernie voters.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

A month ago it was Wuhan that was feeling the pain; by last week the streets of Venice and Rome were empty. If a lot of people get sick in coastal cities, a lot of people are going to get sick in the heartland, and it's not going to take very long. As always, I am impressed by your Marxist conviction that politics follows so directly from economics, but this is a case where I think you're missing something. I'm not sure whether the epidemic is going to cause people to rally to authoritarianism or turn them off Trump's particular combination of braggadocio and incompetence, but I think the political impact will be sui generis and not simply a function of pocketbook issues. Though I do think we're going to get a recession out of this, but I wouldn't assume that people will react the way they ordinarily do in a recession.

eta:

One of the problems in the US has been the testing for Covid-19. We haven't been testing many people, in part because we didn't have the capability, and it's a reasonable guess that there are more cases that haven't been found yet because the symptoms are much like flu symptoms and the CDC's protocol about who gets the test (plausibly necessary to keep everyone from asking for tests and overwhelming the function) meant that until quite recently you could have the symptoms but wouldn't get tested unless you had, e.g., traveled to China. In the last day, Pence and the White House (who are now preventing scientists at the CDC from talking to anyone) have stopped reporting the number of tests being done. The White House seems to view this all from a partisan lens, or at least they have found that a useful way to deflect criticism, but I don't think it's going to play well with voters once more people start dying.

The sole attractive feature of Trump was the economy doing well. (He's done some alright things on foreign policy, as well, but no one wins or loses an election on that.)

This disease only has a 2% death rate. Worst case scenario we have a few thousand deaths. Mostly old and infirm people. Kids don't seem to be impacted much by it. So I don't think you'll see a significant number of dead kids, which would the only type of deaths shocking enough to get people angry.

I thin RT put her finger on the issue that's going to adversely impact Trump. The Main Street economy is going to be be negatively impacted in a way that cannot be addressed with rate cuts. Rate cuts take time and their curing effect comes from propping asset values and (theoretically) increasing lending. The economic damage coming from consumer pullback comes fast, is acute, and can't be fixed with lower rates. If there's no economic activity, it doesn't matter how cheaply banks can borrow from the Fed, as there will be nothing to lend into and no one looking to borrow except bad credit risks looking to replace lost revenue with borrowed dollars to survive until economic activity rebounds.