How many ?

Global economic collapse would kill a lot more than 5 million people in the ensuing starvation and conflict, especially with how unstable global politics already are. Remember it took a world war to end the last depression. Even if that doesn't happen, is 5 million boomers losing their literal lives (which would last for less than another decade anyway) worse than entire generations losing their economic lives and futures? As bad as the disease is, and it shouldn't be understated how bad it is, the current cure might still be worse.

Attached: 1584578630484.jpg (833x671, 89.09K)

0.2% of 330million

if we shut down the entire economy, more will die from the chaos, the lack of food, the crime wave. they're already letting criminals out of prison early. total chaos as in no food, no water, and ex-cons breaking into your house to kill you. a lot of unprepared boomers are already going without toilet paper.

>the current cure might still be worse
I don't disagree, but I see the collapse as inevitable if we allow the disease to run its course

americans are pretty fucking stupid but when we see bodies piling up we will stay home.

Every 1 % unemployment rises causes 40 000 people to die

>Muh corona

>I see the collapse as inevitable if we allow the disease to run its course
How so? 5 million deaths is unspeakably tragic, but in a nation of 300+ million, where those 5 million are mostly economically unproductive elderly whose assets will be inherited by younger generations to reinvest, I don't see a complete collapse coming from that. Plenty of nations have faced worse in wartime and survived. Wheras what we're currently facing, with unemployment numbers worse than the great depression and rising, and the implication of such a collapse on a global economy, is a genuine existential threat. We are in the awful situation of having to choose between the death of millions and society entirely collapsing.

#FinNexus will connect settlement services, trading platforms, brokerage, and a wide range of other service providers.

the smart American isn't going to bet the life of his family on the idea that only old people die. Other countries have shown that's false. Even if the odds are lower the smart money stays home.

also our economy is largely funded and populated by boomers, so unless the next generations are trained and experienced and invested it's just going to funnel boomer estates to hospitals and boomer jobs to the ~85% of boomers that survive.

sorry.

>We are in the awful situation of having to choose between the death of millions and society entirely collapsing.

The collapse was inevitable. Their deaths were inevitable. Better to get it over with. I'm sure you'd love to make it to old age then hand the collapse over to the next generation, like the boomers did, but that's where we're at. Someone had to live through the bad times and it looks like it'll be us.

>We are in the awful situation of having to choose between the death of millions and society entirely collapsing.
not at all

trump has the right idea with mixed and targeted lockdowns. Tone the economic impact to the risk.

if that fails then letting boomers and the disabled won't save the economy because
1. everyone has boomers and sick people in their family they'll need time off to care for or bury
2. even healthy adults that survive this are going to take enough time off of work to crash the economy.

I’m not keeping up with all the numbers but once it was said the death rate is actually dropping well under 1% that was enough to get half the people not caring about it.

America is highly dumb and until they see bodies in the street it’s all fake news now. But the way trump is so brazenly saying get back to work I’m forced to assume they had the cure this whole time and will release it soon before it gets to a breaking point

61,000 Americans died of regular flu in the 2017-2018 winter season.

And then 38k Americans died of the same regular flu the next season.

That's a seasonal variance of 23k death variance for regular flu.
Corona is a blip on the radar compared to the annual VARIANCE of regular flu deaths, let alone total annual flu deaths.

Perspective, it matters.

(also, Obama waited to instate a national emergency until 1.2k deaths back in 2009. Trump did it at a few dozen deaths)

1% is still ten times deadlier than the flu

actual rate is about 4% right now, but that might be because people aren't being tested. But even 1% means almost a million dead americans. People aren't going to stand for that just to save an economy they don't see as benefiting them anyways.

>actual rate is about 4% right now
No it isn't.
The majority of corona cases are never tested.

>Perspective, it matters.

>current numbers are low so future can't be high

this is exactly what OP asked about, at what point does an idiot like yourself decide it's enough?

>The majority of corona cases are never tested.
>but that might be because people aren't being tested.

learn to read, moron

> Global economic collapse would kill a lot more than 5 million people in the ensuing starvation and conflict
And this is a bad thing why exactly?

China, Korea, Japan, Italy, ... already peaked.

In Italy for instance, 25k people died of regular flu in the 2013-2014 flu season.

There's nothing to read.
The majority of cases are never tested for corona, and simply get better on their own.
So any mortality rate for corona right now is absolutely useless.

Why not restructure the economy in a way where supply lines could be seized by local governments and key industries nationalized?

Attached: 1584316343167.jpg (2304x3456, 2.61M)

>There's nothing to read.
holy shit you're retarded

you're disagreeing with me for agreeing with you. Pleas go lick a doorknob on a public bathroom

>How many deaths do justify confinement?
327.2 million

So... communism?

You used the words "actual rate".
In English "actual" means "in reality". Maybe you meant to say "current".

You also said "that MIGHT be because people aren't being tested". There's no question about that.

Because socialism has no means of determining market price to provide efficient distribution. Read Mises.

this

actual refers to real statistics. Whether those statistics are representative or not is a different question.

>actual refers to real statistics
But that's the point: the statistics aren't real.

A better word would've been "reported".

>There's no question about that.
there is, because areas with extensive testing are doing as bad or worse than areas without it.

this could be a sampling bias where the worst areas test more, but it would negate the inaccuracy of the sampling bias where only people with symptoms get tested.

Sorry. Look at Italy numbers. Look at Spain numbers. Fuck it. Lets take the average deaths per million population for every country with over 1,000 total cases. That average is 11.36. You've what? 328 million in the US? So once deaths go over 3,800 you are officially in the 'doing worse than average' group. Look at the strategies employed by most countries 'enjoying' this average or less and then look at your own. American is going to be fucked. You currently enjoy about 1.5x the death rate each day ... sooooo end of the week?

Europe isn't locking shit down because it is fun or easy. It is because of the horrible power of numbers and statistics. America has that crazy freedoms thing so I can't imagine how loot and shoot you guys are going to get when you have to listen to the government for 90 days.

>the statistics aren't real.
of course they're real

they may be wrong, but they're still real

>Global economic collapse would kill a lot more than 5 million people in the ensuing starvation and conflict
In shitholes that don't matter

If this crisis has taught me anything is that the fear over right wing terrorism is just another spook.

Also while we can talk economy and how it isn't abstract and how it is vital to everything for the vast majority of people it is about heath, family and life. A lot of people here have realised they don't actually need the rat race as much as they thought. It only takes a few weeks to change habits.

Of course right now it is peak comfy. Stay at home. Nice weather. Cupboards are stocked with a variety of tasty food. Part of me is concerned with what 3 months or even 6 looks like. I see it as analogous to war time. People come through.

If you think it's a good thing, perhaps you should starve yourself to death and help it along.

>there is, because areas with extensive testing are doing as bad or worse than areas without it.
Okay well let's talk about that.
Germany is known for doing extensive testing, and their mortality rate is 0.5%; but even Germany aren't testing nearly enough to get something that even remotely resembles real numbers.

They're not real in the sense that they are absolutely unusable.

other way around. The fear over Islamic terrorism is a spook

the fear over white terrorism is real and makes sense. There's 103 million potential white terrorists, and like 1 million potential Islamic ones.

They peaked because of their quarantines you imbecile

1000 people in 2 months, some virus. Freeze the economy into a depression.

>The fear over Islamic terrorism is a spook
lol, tell that to Western Europe which is about 6-10% Islamic.

>There's 103 million potential white terrorists, and like 1 million potential Islamic ones.
Now compare their mortality rates.

Remember, the US stats are fake, people avoid the hospital b/c no insurance. Real stats are at least 2x what's listed.

also Bush did 9/11

and Trump will have done 9 9/11s :)

>Italy >Spain

Old and smokers. That’s what you’ll hear telling that to anybody

It isn't going to take 2 months to get 2000.

>Europe
what's that?

Quarantines only flatten the curve, they do not actually reduce anything.

Attached: flatten-the-curve.jpg (1000x666, 47.28K)

...

>They're not real in the sense that they are absolutely unusable.
they're perfectly usable because while we don't know how many have it vs how many die we DO know how many critical cases get tested vs how many die.

and we can track this over time to see how the influence spreads in populations and how quickly it kills.

we won't know the top end of the death rate but we already know it's at least 10 times deadlier than the current flu strains, and that it hospitalizes and kills far more people far more rapidly.

How many it will hospitalize and/or kill is open to question, but the tracking of spread- while incomplete- is enough to scare the shit out of politicians and boomers.

No but in two months its almost June when global warming is going to save us all from bad flu season.
Happening canceled, everyone go home.

The current statistics give a real number of corona deaths (exaggerated even, since Italy counts all corona-correlated deaths as corona-caused deaths), but a completely incorrect number of corona infections.
This MASSIVELY inflates the mortality rate.

The mortality rate is absolutely unusable.

Germany is known for doing extensive testing, and their mortality rate is 0.5%; but even Germany aren't testing nearly enough to get something that even remotely resembles real infection numbers.

Bullish for Suterusu and the Asian recovery.

Also want to say that there is a fair chance a lot of people have already had CV19. I can imagine that before the first confirmed case was laid up tested in hospital for the statistics there were people asymptomatic out there spreading it, people coming down with what they thought was just the flu 3-5 days later, second, third and forth generation even before the some of the first cases were failing to recover and becoming the first round of hospital admissions.

A lack of testing in the general population skews the numbers because for every confirmed death they'll be a 1,000 cases who don't know they've had it and never see the inside of a hospital let alone a test. If your policy is to tell everybody to treat at home unless serious and then when serious treat as a generic viral respiratory condition until death then test and boom 100% death rate.

That is why I prefer to use recorded deaths per 1m general population. It is about as objective as it is possible to get with all the different possible configurations of testing protocol out there in the world.

Average of 11 per million WITH a functional health system = 0.000011%. 85,800 dead? It is enough to make me a conspiracy nut with the reaction to this. Climate change. Insect death. Geopolitical restructuring and 'correction' of markets. We all knew a happening was coming march 2020 because of the asset bubble, just not what form it would take.

Death of human race is priced in

>The mortality rate is absolutely unusable.
I'm speaking only of the US. Like most americans I don't give a fuck what happens in germany.

in the US we've seen and tracked infections as they've arrived various places and we've watched death rates in those places against infection rates where everyone that feels slightly ill has gotten tested.

we're running higher than 4% and that's less than a week in for most places. That number is going above 8% and may go over 15% because people aren't being tested.

1% is a very low estimate here. And even that's 10 times worse than our flu stats. And it doesn't negate flu stats, it's ON TOP OF what we already expect the flu to kill.

>we've watched death rates in those places against infection rates
Impossible, since only a fraction of the infected are even tested.

>Impossible, since only a fraction of the infected are even tested.
we know from places that test how many don't show symptoms. It's not that high. If we test everyone with symptoms we're catching most of the cases. Time progressions of reported cases indicate this is true by increasing at a rate predicted by most cases being known.

we've stopped testing now because everyone is getting it. From that point we go to estimates. And estimates indicate 1-5 million americans will die.

>estimates indicate 1-5 million americans will die.
btw this is a range of .3%-1.5% mortality. Much lower than the 4% we appear to have. But still 3-15 times deadlier than the flu.

they reduce the number of deaths caused by triage. the actual mortality is quite low but of course higher if you can't give patients respirators

user, I feel it's important for you to know that you're very, very dumb, and that you should take that into consideration before making any big moves.

Trump explained that in his speech. Because the government has no clue who might have some experience building ventilators. Under capitalism, the ones that can, do.