Jump to content

“CoronaVirus is overblown press-created hysteria”


NorCalRuss

Recommended Posts

The Rubicon has been crossed.  We are not going back to lockdowns.  There will be spikes and outbreaks, but we will muddle through.  The health cost, the economic cost and the social cost is simply too great to go back.  There is a fear porn industry (200,000 cases a day and 3,000 deaths a day by June 1 - remember?), but modeling has proven to be quite useless.  The “save every life crowd”, while meaning well (at least some of them), is simply unrealistic.  We cannot continue what we have done for the last 3 months without destroying the world for our children.

  • Thanks 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 731
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

4 hours ago, Mjd33 said:

2. Statistics have proven over time For every 1% increase in unemployment that equates to approximately 30,000 deaths 

So the aftermath will result in a multiple of more deaths relating to unemployment rising than covid 19. 

So this should be easy to support once all the numbers are in.

I look forward to you coming back to account for it.

  • Like 2
  • Thumbs Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The Guru said:

So this should be easy to support once all the numbers are in.

I look forward to you coming back to account for it.

Many Studies have been done on this topic and it isn’t anything ground breaking but rather quite logical. What do you think mortality rate decreases as unemployment rises? Even you wouldn’t argue that. 

https://news.yale.edu/2002/05/23/rising-unemployment-causes-higher-death-rates-new-study-yale-researcher-shows

Michael Lewis, somebody a lot smarter than fucking you, who graduated from Princeton and The London school of economics (not FAU)  wrote it was actually higher at 40,000 per 1% unemployment increase. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Mjd33 said:

Many Studies have been done on this topic and it isn’t anything ground breaking but rather quite logical. What do you think mortality rate decreases as unemployment rises? Even you wouldn’t argue that. 

https://news.yale.edu/2002/05/23/rising-unemployment-causes-higher-death-rates-new-study-yale-researcher-shows

It's a truism but not something that you'll ever be able to prove.

For every 1% of unemployment 30,000 people will die. OK, when? What are the causes of death? I trust that when 420,000 people die from the lockdown/unemployment that you'll be able to prove it, right?

I won't hold my breath.

Yes, economic depressions lead to higher mental health risks, depression, etc. But putting a number to it that has no basis in observable fact is silly.

The suicide number is real. about 4,500 more people committed suicide at the time of the last recession (2008-09). OK, that's a real thing that can be supported by actual reality.

What you posted is fantastical.

  • Like 2
  • Thumbs Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Mjd33 said:

Michael Lewis, somebody a lot smarter than fucking you, who graduated from Princeton and The London school of economics (not FAU)  wrote it was actually higher at 40,000 per 1% unemployment increase. 

I'm a fan of Michael Lewis but he's an author who has a degree in Art History. He doesn't have magical powers. He didn't come up with that number himself. He got it from somewhere. Probably a study similar to the one you posted.

It's not my fault that your link was complete horseshit and didn't say anything about the actual causes of death.

  • Haha 2
  • Thumbs Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, The Guru said:

I'm a fan of Michael Lewis but he's an author who has a degree in Art History

From Princeton. And he’s Not an affirmative action pity admit or recruited athlete which means he’s not a dipshit. 

And he got into and graduated from the London school of economics which has a lower than 10% acceptance rate where only the cream of the crop applies. Had a successful career at Salomon brothers, wrote a dozen best sellers etc etc etc 

Let’s see A high school football forum troll vs one of the most credentialed authors in the country. Yes, Let’s take your word :) 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mjd33 said:

From Princeton. And he’s Not an affirmative action pity admit or recruited athlete which means he’s not a dipshit. 

And he got into and graduated from the London school of economics which has a lower than 10% acceptance rate where only the cream of the crop applies. Had a successful career at Salomon brothers, wrote a dozen best sellers etc etc etc 

Let’s see A high school football forum troll vs one of the most credentialed authors in the country. Yes, Let’s take your word :) 

 

Nice rebuttal. 
 

bgw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BUFORDGAWOLVES said:

Nice rebuttal. 
 

bgw

I thought so.

He’s discrediting a man who made the statement who is substantially more credible. I gave his bio overview to belittle guru’s resume next to his which obviously  isn’t hard. 

Maybe you think mortality rate decreases as unemployment rises lmao 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if the calculations are correct, that 10 percentage point-plus rise in the jobless rate would cause more than 400,000 deaths that have nothing to do with the virus and everything to do with the distressed economy.

And, of course, there will be a lot of financial troubles for those who don’t die. But let’s just look at just the death rate.

The actual figure in academic research is a 37,000 increase for each percentage-point rise in the unemployment rate. It comes from a book called “Corporate Flight: The Causes and Consequences of Economic Dislocation” by Barry Bluestone, Bennett Harrison and Lawrence Baker.

“Corporate Flight” was published in 1982 and mainly had to do with companies moving operations overseas. I couldn’t reach Bluestone, Harrison or Baker, but last week I was able to contact Wade Thomas, who teaches economics and business at SUNY Oneonta and who quoted those figures in his own co-written 2005 book called “Economic Issues Today: Alternative Approaches.”

Here’s the paragraph from Thomas’ book that applies: “According to one study [the one by Bluestone et al.] a 1 percent increase in the unemployment rate will be associated with 37,000 deaths [including 20,000 heart attacks], 920 suicides, 650 homicides, 4,000 state mental hospital admissions and 3,300 state prison admissions.”

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Mjd33 said:

Let’s see A high school football forum troll vs one of the most credentialed authors in the country. Yes, Let’s take your word :)

Again, I'm a fan of his work. I just don't think he has magical powers to prove something that's, so far, been unprovable.

Your point is lost on all reasonable people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Mjd33 said:

You nor I are pinning a number to it .... people that DID the research are.

You haven't come close to addressing my point. Who cares if you didn't put a number to it? You're appealing to the authority of the people who did despite those people having no basis for actually counting the number of deaths when they occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Mjd33 said:

So, if the calculations are correct, that 10 percentage point-plus rise in the jobless rate would cause more than 400,000 deaths that have nothing to do with the virus and everything to do with the distressed economy.

And, of course, there will be a lot of financial troubles for those who don’t die. But let’s just look at just the death rate.

The actual figure in academic research is a 37,000 increase for each percentage-point rise in the unemployment rate. It comes from a book called “Corporate Flight: The Causes and Consequences of Economic Dislocation” by Barry Bluestone, Bennett Harrison and Lawrence Baker.

“Corporate Flight” was published in 1982 and mainly had to do with companies moving operations overseas. I couldn’t reach Bluestone, Harrison or Baker, but last week I was able to contact Wade Thomas, who teaches economics and business at SUNY Oneonta and who quoted those figures in his own co-written 2005 book called “Economic Issues Today: Alternative Approaches.”

Here’s the paragraph from Thomas’ book that applies: “According to one study [the one by Bluestone et al.] a 1 percent increase in the unemployment rate will be associated with 37,000 deaths [including 20,000 heart attacks], 920 suicides, 650 homicides, 4,000 state mental hospital admissions and 3,300 state prison admissions.”

So one study that cites numbers that don't even add up to 37,000 and includes a lot parentheses and commas that suggest that deaths and suicides are not part of the same grouping.

If you add up all of causes of death it equals only 21,570.

But, again, it's confusing since a reading of that sentence makes it seem that everything after 37,000 deaths are a separate category.

You just listed a block of text that cited the number, again, without giving any methodology or legit cause of death data.

But, as I said, I'm sure that you'll be able to account for this once all 592,000 people die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

People have based all kinds of policy positions on estimates and guesstimates and models.

Now that we have pretty solid data on fatality rates by age and gender and know that certain underlying conditions present higher risk,  there are those that still want the overwhelming majority of the country who is at low risk to remain as "shut down" as possible.  And damn any study that suggests that the lock downs have been unhelpful (or even counterproductive), I guess.

Apparently some on here have adopted a "nothing to see here" attitude regarding the risks of continued social restrictions to health and safety (domestic abuse, suicide, depression, crime, etc), let alone how the country will be affected by longer term by the debt and economic/financial destruction being wrought on the nation.

 

U.S.-death-rates.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, concha said:

Now that we have pretty solid data on fatality rates by age and gender and know that certain underlying conditions present higher risk,  there are those that still want the overwhelming majority of the country who is at low risk to remain as "shut down" as possible.  And damn any study that suggests that the lock downs have been unhelpful (or even counterproductive), I guess.

Every single state is at least partially reopened and most will be totally reopened by sometime in June.

I guess "those" people you are referring to are either few and far between or have no authority whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, concha said:

Apparently some on here have adopted a "nothing to see here" attitude regarding the risks of continued social restrictions to health and safety (domestic abuse, suicide, depression, crime, etc), let alone how the country will be affected by longer term by the debt and economic/financial destruction being wrought on the nation

Every decision can have unintended consequences.

But tough decisions have to be made regardless of these consequences.

You have adopted a "nothing to see here" attitude regarding COVID-19 from the beginning and have been proven wrong and so now you are trying to gin up opposition to the lockdown via these nonsense deaths of despair numbers.

concha now concerned about the debt.

😄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Guru said:

Every single state is at least partially reopened and most will be totally reopened by sometime in June.

I guess "those" people you are referring to are either few and far between or have no authority whatsoever.

 

Apparently you have reading comprehension issues.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Guru said:

 

You have adopted a "nothing to see here" attitude regarding COVID-19 from the beginning and have been proven wrong and so now you are trying to gin up opposition to the lockdown via these nonsense deaths of despair numbers.

concha now concerned about the debt.

😄

 

1) I have? Do tell.

2) I'm always concerned about debt, the size of government, intrusion on our liberties...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, concha said:

1) I have? Do tell.

Took less than 5 minutes.

👇

On 3/15/2020 at 10:16 AM, concha said:

Perspective:

CDC estimates that so far this season there have been at least 36 million flu illnesses, 370,000 hospitalizations and 22,000 deaths from flu.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, concha said:

1) I have? Do tell.

 

On 3/16/2020 at 12:26 AM, concha said:

Why the severe reaction to this, but not to the flu, which the CDC estimates has infected at least 36 million just in this country this season and killed tens of thousands?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...