[teejers1]

FWIW San Mateo county has banned gatherings larger than 50, and has stated that gatherings between 10-50 can only go ahead with a bunch of precautions. 

Spain, like Italy, has shut down. France has shut down all non-essential establishments, including the cafe’s.

BC

\

So . . . non sequitur.  All multi-person activities are to be treated the same.  Really?

BTW, a prominent player parent posted on the other site the very real ramifications of blind "shut down" mode, particularly for those struggling to feed families, etc.  The total shut down that many/most here advocate will cost countless jobs and all that entails.  And that will occur in both affluent and less-affluent areas.  No one ever wants to talk about these costs/impacts/damages on lives.  Maybe that's because most/all here on this site will financially weather this storm.  But that is decidedly not the case for hundreds of thousands of folks in this state alone.

Same poster noted that "flattening the curve" does nothing to prevent old/vulnerable people from getting the virus; but rather, has a goal of spacing things out so when they do get the virus there will be health resources (beds/ventilators) available.  I think that is correct.  The virus is going to run its course through our communities . . . it's just a matter of time.

Another poster on other site said Britain has largely opted for modified shut down - not total shut down - for this reason (i.e., costs of total shutdown are too great).  Of course, private enterprise may make their own decisions and result in an effective total shutdown anyway.  That's very close to what we're seeing here.

BTW, I hope social distancing will have the positive effects many here assume.  Our family is practicing it (I am the ones making runs to stores for necessities), and other than some outdoor exercise are generally staying close - at least for next week or so to ensure we're all still symptom free.

[teejers1]

FWIW San Mateo county has banned gatherings larger than 50, and has stated that gatherings between 10-50 can only go ahead with a bunch of precautions. 

Spain, like Italy, has shut down. France has shut down all non-essential establishments, including the cafe’s.

BC

\

So . . . non sequitur.  All multi-person activities are to be treated the same.  Really?

BTW, a prominent player parent posted on the other site the very real ramifications of blind "shut down" mode, particularly for those struggling to feed families, etc.  The total shut down that many/most here advocate will cost countless jobs and all that entails.  And that will occur in both affluent and less-affluent areas.  No one ever wants to talk about these costs/impacts/damages on lives.  Maybe that's because most/all here on this site will financially weather this storm.  But that is decidedly not the case for hundreds of thousands of folks in this state alone.

Same poster noted that "flattening the curve" does nothing to prevent old/vulnerable people from getting the virus; but rather, has a goal of spacing things out so when they do get the virus there will be health resources (beds/ventilators) available.  I think that is correct.  The virus is going to run its course through our communities . . . it's just a matter of time.

Another poster on other site said Britain has largely opted for modified shut down - not total shut down - for this reason (i.e., costs of total shutdown are too great).  Of course, private enterprise may make their own decisions and result in an effective total shutdown anyway.  That's very close to what we're seeing here.

BTW, I hope social distancing will have the positive effects many here assume.  Our family is practicing it (I am the ones making runs to stores for necessities), and other than some outdoor exercise are generally staying close - at least for next week or so to ensure we're all still symptom free.

[Mick]

The total shut down that many/most here advocate will cost countless jobs and all that entails.  And that will occur in both affluent and less-affluent areas.  No one ever wants to talk about these costs/impacts/damages on lives.  Maybe that's because most/all here on this site will financially weather this storm.  But that is decidedly not the case for hundreds of thousands of folks in this state alone.

Another poster on other site said Britain has largely opted for modified shut down - not total shut down - for this reason (i.e., costs of total shutdown are too great).  Of course, private enterprise may make their own decisions and result in an effective total shutdown anyway.  That's very close to what we're seeing here.

I think we have collectively understimated the vast losses to our society that a total shutdown means.  We may not be able to come back from it, not fully. And there will be an extraordinarly number of collateral deaths.  Sure, the guy who lost his job because his company suspended operations and therefore he committed suicide -- that's a death that will happen solely because of an overreaction to the corona virus.  And that's where we're headed, folks.  Tens of millions of people losing their jobs.

[Mick]

The total shut down that many/most here advocate will cost countless jobs and all that entails.  And that will occur in both affluent and less-affluent areas.  No one ever wants to talk about these costs/impacts/damages on lives.  Maybe that's because most/all here on this site will financially weather this storm.  But that is decidedly not the case for hundreds of thousands of folks in this state alone.

Another poster on other site said Britain has largely opted for modified shut down - not total shut down - for this reason (i.e., costs of total shutdown are too great).  Of course, private enterprise may make their own decisions and result in an effective total shutdown anyway.  That's very close to what we're seeing here.

I think we have collectively understimated the vast losses to our society that a total shutdown means.  We may not be able to come back from it, not fully. And there will be an extraordinarly number of collateral deaths.  Sure, the guy who lost his job because his company suspended operations and therefore he committed suicide -- that's a death that will happen solely because of an overreaction to the corona virus.  And that's where we're headed, folks.  Tens of millions of people losing their jobs.

[burger]

The total shut down that many/most here advocate will cost countless jobs and all that entails.  And that will occur in both affluent and less-affluent areas.  No one ever wants to talk about these costs/impacts/damages on lives.  Maybe that's because most/all here on this site will financially weather this storm.  But that is decidedly not the case for hundreds of thousands of folks in this state alone.

Another poster on other site said Britain has largely opted for modified shut down - not total shut down - for this reason (i.e., costs of total shutdown are too great).  Of course, private enterprise may make their own decisions and result in an effective total shutdown anyway.  That's very close to what we're seeing here.

I think we have collectively understimated the vast losses to our society that a total shutdown means.  We may not be able to come back from it, not fully. And there will be an extraordinarly number of collateral deaths.  Sure, the guy who lost his job because his company suspended operations and therefore he committed suicide -- that's a death that will happen solely because of an overreaction to the corona virus.  And that's where we're headed, folks.  Tens of millions of people losing their jobs.

The job losses are inevitable.  They will either happen by government order or when people start staying at home voluntarily.  But you can keep people financially solvent by sending everyone checks so they can cover food and medicine, etc.  That, plus either suspend all rents and mortgage payments or just suspend evictions and foreclosures.

If the Fed can spend $1.5 trillion to keep financial markets going, they can spend that to keep people from running out of money for food.

Meanwhile, the (very) modest emergency spending package that the House passed last week is now on hold in the senate pending a meeting of Republicans on Tuesday.  God forbid we expand government slightly.

[burger]

The total shut down that many/most here advocate will cost countless jobs and all that entails.  And that will occur in both affluent and less-affluent areas.  No one ever wants to talk about these costs/impacts/damages on lives.  Maybe that's because most/all here on this site will financially weather this storm.  But that is decidedly not the case for hundreds of thousands of folks in this state alone.

Another poster on other site said Britain has largely opted for modified shut down - not total shut down - for this reason (i.e., costs of total shutdown are too great).  Of course, private enterprise may make their own decisions and result in an effective total shutdown anyway.  That's very close to what we're seeing here.

I think we have collectively understimated the vast losses to our society that a total shutdown means.  We may not be able to come back from it, not fully. And there will be an extraordinarly number of collateral deaths.  Sure, the guy who lost his job because his company suspended operations and therefore he committed suicide -- that's a death that will happen solely because of an overreaction to the corona virus.  And that's where we're headed, folks.  Tens of millions of people losing their jobs.

The job losses are inevitable.  They will either happen by government order or when people start staying at home voluntarily.  But you can keep people financially solvent by sending everyone checks so they can cover food and medicine, etc.  That, plus either suspend all rents and mortgage payments or just suspend evictions and foreclosures.

If the Fed can spend $1.5 trillion to keep financial markets going, they can spend that to keep people from running out of money for food.

Meanwhile, the (very) modest emergency spending package that the House passed last week is now on hold in the senate pending a meeting of Republicans on Tuesday.  God forbid we expand government slightly.

[BostonCard]

The economic consequences should not be taken lightly, for sure. But as burger points out, the hit is coming no matter what. It will either come electively when people voluntarily stay home in order to slow the spread, or it will happen when large swaths of the public are infected and can’t work, or decide to stay home because the pandemic hits home when a friend or relative is stricken, and the night,y news shows scenes of mass chaos in hospitals that are literally having to make decisions about who to attempt to keep alive and who has to be allowed to die.

I think there are two attitudes that we need to protect ourselves against.  The first is that this is no big deal and we are all overreacting.  The experience of places like Italy tells us that if we don’t “overreact” now, we will be overwhelmed later.  The second is that the virus is here and there is nothing we can do but ride it out.  That too is surrender monkey defeatism,  countries like South Korea (https://www.worldometers.info/coronaviru...uth-korea/) and Hong Kong have shown that the infections can be brought under control. Once the infection is brought down to manageable levels it can be controlled by old fashioned means (rapid identification of patients with subsequent quarantine and contact tracing and monitoring).  If that can be accomplished, the most vulnerable amongst us can be protected long enough for effective treatments and vaccines to be developed (1 year at the fastest, but probably more like 18 months to two years).  That will protect people like my friend Larissa, who was born with cystic fibrosis and had a lung transplant two years ago and has two elementary school kids.  People like my parents and uncles and aunts who by virtue of age will be at highest risk.  People like the Dr. in Hubei, who was in his thirties and tried to warm the world about the new mysterious illness, and eventually succumbed to it.  Many of our own board members are on the front lines and at high risk. (Not to mention the segment of this board that is in the highest risk age category).  Even though the mortality among younger people is not as high as with older patients, it’s not zero either.   And even amongst the people who survive and recover it is looking like more have persistent respiratory impairment.  Time is lives saved here, and we are buying time.

BC

[BostonCard]

The economic consequences should not be taken lightly, for sure. But as burger points out, the hit is coming no matter what. It will either come electively when people voluntarily stay home in order to slow the spread, or it will happen when large swaths of the public are infected and can’t work, or decide to stay home because the pandemic hits home when a friend or relative is stricken, and the night,y news shows scenes of mass chaos in hospitals that are literally having to make decisions about who to attempt to keep alive and who has to be allowed to die.

I think there are two attitudes that we need to protect ourselves against.  The first is that this is no big deal and we are all overreacting.  The experience of places like Italy tells us that if we don’t “overreact” now, we will be overwhelmed later.  The second is that the virus is here and there is nothing we can do but ride it out.  That too is surrender monkey defeatism,  countries like South Korea (https://www.worldometers.info/coronaviru...uth-korea/) and Hong Kong have shown that the infections can be brought under control. Once the infection is brought down to manageable levels it can be controlled by old fashioned means (rapid identification of patients with subsequent quarantine and contact tracing and monitoring).  If that can be accomplished, the most vulnerable amongst us can be protected long enough for effective treatments and vaccines to be developed (1 year at the fastest, but probably more like 18 months to two years).  That will protect people like my friend Larissa, who was born with cystic fibrosis and had a lung transplant two years ago and has two elementary school kids.  People like my parents and uncles and aunts who by virtue of age will be at highest risk.  People like the Dr. in Hubei, who was in his thirties and tried to warm the world about the new mysterious illness, and eventually succumbed to it.  Many of our own board members are on the front lines and at high risk. (Not to mention the segment of this board that is in the highest risk age category).  Even though the mortality among younger people is not as high as with older patients, it’s not zero either.   And even amongst the people who survive and recover it is looking like more have persistent respiratory impairment.  Time is lives saved here, and we are buying time.

BC

[Mick]

The economic consequences should not be taken lightly, for sure. But as burger points out, the hit is coming no matter what. It will either come electively when people voluntarily stay home in order to slow the spread, or it will happen when large swaths of the public are infected and can’t work, or decide to stay home because the pandemic hits home when a friend or relative is stricken, and the night,y news shows scenes of mass chaos in hospitals that are literally having to make decisions about who to attempt to keep alive and who has to be allowed to die.

I think there are two attitudes that we need to protect ourselves against.  The first is that this is no big deal and we are all overreacting.  

51% of working Americans have less than one paycheck in the bank.  That's more than half of all working Americans, about 79,436,700 people.  Four in ten Americans can't afford an unexpected $400 expense.  And we're telling folks to stay home from jobs.  Those that can work from home, great.  Lots cannot.  And I'll tell you what I've been hearing.  Large American companies are hoarding cash.  That means a lot of their vendors will close down or fire people.

American finances on Main Street are precarious.  I don't think people on this board quite understand how precarious.  $55 billion is a fart in a windstorm compared to the level of need.  If they're going to spend $1.5 trillion they'd better spend it RFN.  I'd rather not wake up to a ruined country a year from now.  Or a month from now.

[Mick]

The economic consequences should not be taken lightly, for sure. But as burger points out, the hit is coming no matter what. It will either come electively when people voluntarily stay home in order to slow the spread, or it will happen when large swaths of the public are infected and can’t work, or decide to stay home because the pandemic hits home when a friend or relative is stricken, and the night,y news shows scenes of mass chaos in hospitals that are literally having to make decisions about who to attempt to keep alive and who has to be allowed to die.

I think there are two attitudes that we need to protect ourselves against.  The first is that this is no big deal and we are all overreacting.  

51% of working Americans have less than one paycheck in the bank.  That's more than half of all working Americans, about 79,436,700 people.  Four in ten Americans can't afford an unexpected $400 expense.  And we're telling folks to stay home from jobs.  Those that can work from home, great.  Lots cannot.  And I'll tell you what I've been hearing.  Large American companies are hoarding cash.  That means a lot of their vendors will close down or fire people.

American finances on Main Street are precarious.  I don't think people on this board quite understand how precarious.  $55 billion is a fart in a windstorm compared to the level of need.  If they're going to spend $1.5 trillion they'd better spend it RFN.  I'd rather not wake up to a ruined country a year from now.  Or a month from now.

[BostonCard]

I don’t disagree. I have a feeling that a TARP-like bailout will be needed (and will pass).  On the plus side, interest rates are virtually zero, so a package that’s 5% of GDP ($1 trillion) can probably pass without hurting long term fiscal stability much. On the other hand, I wish we didn’t have trillion dollar deficits going into this.  I guess the good news is that we can finally make infrastructure week a thing.

BC

[BostonCard]

I don’t disagree. I have a feeling that a TARP-like bailout will be needed (and will pass).  On the plus side, interest rates are virtually zero, so a package that’s 5% of GDP ($1 trillion) can probably pass without hurting long term fiscal stability much. On the other hand, I wish we didn’t have trillion dollar deficits going into this.  I guess the good news is that we can finally make infrastructure week a thing.

BC

[Mick]

I don’t disagree. I have a feeling that a TARP-like bailout will be needed (and will pass).  On the plus side, interest rates are virtually zero, so a package that’s 5% of GDP ($1 trillion) can probably pass without hurting long term fiscal stability much. On the other hand, I wish we didn’t have trillion dollar deficits going into this.  I guess the good news is that we can finally make infrastructure week a thing.

BC

This just in...New York's manufacturing index is down 34 points to -21.5, its lowest level since 2009's crisis.  Outlook for the months ahead also collapsed.  Firms no longer expect beneral business conditions to be better over the next six months.  The index for future business conditions declined 22 points to 1.2, also the lowest level since 2009.

This is a country that is in economic freefall, of our own making.

[Mick]

I don’t disagree. I have a feeling that a TARP-like bailout will be needed (and will pass).  On the plus side, interest rates are virtually zero, so a package that’s 5% of GDP ($1 trillion) can probably pass without hurting long term fiscal stability much. On the other hand, I wish we didn’t have trillion dollar deficits going into this.  I guess the good news is that we can finally make infrastructure week a thing.

BC

This just in...New York's manufacturing index is down 34 points to -21.5, its lowest level since 2009's crisis.  Outlook for the months ahead also collapsed.  Firms no longer expect beneral business conditions to be better over the next six months.  The index for future business conditions declined 22 points to 1.2, also the lowest level since 2009.

This is a country that is in economic freefall, of our own making.

[burger]

51% of working Americans have less than one paycheck in the bank.  That's more than half of all working Americans, about 79,436,700 people.  Four in ten Americans can't afford an unexpected $400 expense.  And we're telling folks to stay home from jobs.  Those that can work from home, great.  Lots cannot.  And I'll tell you what I've been hearing.  Large American companies are hoarding cash.  That means a lot of their vendors will close down or fire people.

American finances on Main Street are precarious.  I don't think people on this board quite understand how precarious.  $55 billion is a fart in a windstorm compared to the level of need.  If they're going to spend $1.5 trillion they'd better spend it RFN.  I'd rather not wake up to a ruined country a year from now.  Or a month from now.

This can't be emphasized enough.  Millions of people are about to lose their jobs, and soon many of them will not be able to afford rent or food (much less the staggering medical bills some of them will be saddled with).  Checks need to start going out asap to everyone.  There is no other way to do this.

[burger]

51% of working Americans have less than one paycheck in the bank.  That's more than half of all working Americans, about 79,436,700 people.  Four in ten Americans can't afford an unexpected $400 expense.  And we're telling folks to stay home from jobs.  Those that can work from home, great.  Lots cannot.  And I'll tell you what I've been hearing.  Large American companies are hoarding cash.  That means a lot of their vendors will close down or fire people.

American finances on Main Street are precarious.  I don't think people on this board quite understand how precarious.  $55 billion is a fart in a windstorm compared to the level of need.  If they're going to spend $1.5 trillion they'd better spend it RFN.  I'd rather not wake up to a ruined country a year from now.  Or a month from now.

This can't be emphasized enough.  Millions of people are about to lose their jobs, and soon many of them will not be able to afford rent or food (much less the staggering medical bills some of them will be saddled with).  Checks need to start going out asap to everyone.  There is no other way to do this.

[winflop]

I don’t disagree. I have a feeling that a TARP-like bailout will be needed (and will pass).  On the plus side, interest rates are virtually zero, so a package that’s 5% of GDP ($1 trillion) can probably pass without hurting long term fiscal stability much. On the other hand, I wish we didn’t have trillion dollar deficits going into this.  I guess the good news is that we can finally make infrastructure week a thing.

BC

This just in...New York's manufacturing index is down 34 points to -21.5, its lowest level since 2009's crisis.  Outlook for the months ahead also collapsed.  Firms no longer expect beneral business conditions to be better over the next six months.  The index for future business conditions declined 22 points to 1.2, also the lowest level since 2009.

This is a country that is in economic freefall, of our own making.

And it will be this way going forward until we get our arms around just how big the problem is, and start seeing a levelling off/decline of positive tests. When there is uncertainty, business plan for the worst and hope for the best.

I personally don't expect to see conditions last for that long, but the next couple months are gonna be Hell.

[winflop]

I don’t disagree. I have a feeling that a TARP-like bailout will be needed (and will pass).  On the plus side, interest rates are virtually zero, so a package that’s 5% of GDP ($1 trillion) can probably pass without hurting long term fiscal stability much. On the other hand, I wish we didn’t have trillion dollar deficits going into this.  I guess the good news is that we can finally make infrastructure week a thing.

BC

This just in...New York's manufacturing index is down 34 points to -21.5, its lowest level since 2009's crisis.  Outlook for the months ahead also collapsed.  Firms no longer expect beneral business conditions to be better over the next six months.  The index for future business conditions declined 22 points to 1.2, also the lowest level since 2009.

This is a country that is in economic freefall, of our own making.

And it will be this way going forward until we get our arms around just how big the problem is, and start seeing a levelling off/decline of positive tests. When there is uncertainty, business plan for the worst and hope for the best.

I personally don't expect to see conditions last for that long, but the next couple months are gonna be Hell.

[burger]

Mitt Romney just proposed $1000/month payments to all Americans during the outbreak.  This is still not enough though.  This will not cover food + rent + health insurance + utilities for people without savings who can't work the next few (several?) months.  We still need a freeze on foreclosures and evictions and/or a freeze on rent and mortage payments

BTW, if you had Mitt Romney in the "who will be the first senator to propose a universal basic income" pool, well done!  Somewhere, Andre Yang is smiling.

[burger]

Mitt Romney just proposed $1000/month payments to all Americans during the outbreak.  This is still not enough though.  This will not cover food + rent + health insurance + utilities for people without savings who can't work the next few (several?) months.  We still need a freeze on foreclosures and evictions and/or a freeze on rent and mortage payments

BTW, if you had Mitt Romney in the "who will be the first senator to propose a universal basic income" pool, well done!  Somewhere, Andre Yang is smiling.

[BostonCard]

I don’t disagree. I have a feeling that a TARP-like bailout will be needed (and will pass).  On the plus side, interest rates are virtually zero, so a package that’s 5% of GDP ($1 trillion) can probably pass without hurting long term fiscal stability much. On the other hand, I wish we didn’t have trillion dollar deficits going into this.  I guess the good news is that we can finally make infrastructure week a thing.

BC

This just in...New York's manufacturing index is down 34 points to -21.5, its lowest level since 2009's crisis.  Outlook for the months ahead also collapsed.  Firms no longer expect beneral business conditions to be better over the next six months.  The index for future business conditions declined 22 points to 1.2, also the lowest level since 2009.

This is a country that is in economic freefall, of our own making.

Not sure what you mean by "of our own making".  It's not like there isn't a virus out there with a mortality of 1 - 3% that if left to its own devices would infect something like 200 to 300 million Americans (and therefore kill between 1 and 10 million Americans).

BC

[BostonCard]

I don’t disagree. I have a feeling that a TARP-like bailout will be needed (and will pass).  On the plus side, interest rates are virtually zero, so a package that’s 5% of GDP ($1 trillion) can probably pass without hurting long term fiscal stability much. On the other hand, I wish we didn’t have trillion dollar deficits going into this.  I guess the good news is that we can finally make infrastructure week a thing.

BC

This just in...New York's manufacturing index is down 34 points to -21.5, its lowest level since 2009's crisis.  Outlook for the months ahead also collapsed.  Firms no longer expect beneral business conditions to be better over the next six months.  The index for future business conditions declined 22 points to 1.2, also the lowest level since 2009.

This is a country that is in economic freefall, of our own making.

Not sure what you mean by "of our own making".  It's not like there isn't a virus out there with a mortality of 1 - 3% that if left to its own devices would infect something like 200 to 300 million Americans (and therefore kill between 1 and 10 million Americans).

BC