[BostonCard]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/adam_tooze/status/1317057708273651713?s=20[/tweet]

This is an interesting plot.  There is generally an inverse correlation between how many deaths a country (per capita) has had and how much its economy has declined.  That's not a surprise, when countries are overwhelmed with COVID deaths, people are going to stay home, and governments react by imposing severe lockdowns.

There is one outlier in this correlation: Sweden.  And obviously, the big difference is that Sweden did resisted putting in lockdowns.  Your thoughts on Sweden will depend on whether you believe that had Sweden imposed harsh lockdowns it would have done little to stem the deaths and would have pushed the economic hit more akin to the UK or Spain, or if it had imposed more restrictions, it would have prevented deaths and Sweden would have looked a lot more like Denmark, Finland, or Norway.

My opinion is that early and decisive action (even if it was short of a complete lockdown) did a lot to stem rising case counts and deaths and allowed countries like Germany, Denmark, Norway and Sweden to escape the large number of deaths seen in Italy, Spain, and the UK, and also not have the economic hit caused by both individual choices and strict lockdowns imposed from above.

BC

[BostonCard]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/adam_tooze/status/1317057708273651713?s=20[/tweet]

This is an interesting plot.  There is generally an inverse correlation between how many deaths a country (per capita) has had and how much its economy has declined.  That's not a surprise, when countries are overwhelmed with COVID deaths, people are going to stay home, and governments react by imposing severe lockdowns.

There is one outlier in this correlation: Sweden.  And obviously, the big difference is that Sweden did resisted putting in lockdowns.  Your thoughts on Sweden will depend on whether you believe that had Sweden imposed harsh lockdowns it would have done little to stem the deaths and would have pushed the economic hit more akin to the UK or Spain, or if it had imposed more restrictions, it would have prevented deaths and Sweden would have looked a lot more like Denmark, Finland, or Norway.

My opinion is that early and decisive action (even if it was short of a complete lockdown) did a lot to stem rising case counts and deaths and allowed countries like Germany, Denmark, Norway and Sweden to escape the large number of deaths seen in Italy, Spain, and the UK, and also not have the economic hit caused by both individual choices and strict lockdowns imposed from above.

BC

[oregontim]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/adam_tooze/status/1317057708273651713?s=20[/tweet]



There is one outlier in this correlation: Sweden.  And obviously, the big difference is that Sweden did resisted putting in lockdowns.  Your thoughts on Sweden will depend on whether you believe that had Sweden imposed harsh lockdowns it would have done little to stem the deaths and would have pushed the economic hit more akin to the UK or Spain, or if it had imposed more restrictions, it would have prevented deaths and Sweden would have looked a lot more like Denmark, Finland, or Norway.

BC

Excellent post, BC, the plot itself is fascinating. I'd love to see the US compared.

And there's a nice coincidence today with what was posted in the Overlooked variable ... thread by DocSavage87, looking specifically at results in Sweden and why they might differ so much ... the quote he includes in his post there is as follows:

Once we recognize super-spreading as a key lever, countries that look as if they were too relaxed in some aspects appear very different, and our usual polarized debates about the pandemic are scrambled, too. Take Sweden, an alleged example of the great success or the terrible failure of herd immunity without lockdowns, depending on whom you ask. In reality, although Sweden joins many other countries in failing to protect elderly populations in congregate-living facilities, its measures that target super-spreading have been stricter than many other European countries. Although it did not have a complete lockdown, as Kucharski pointed out to me, Sweden imposed a 50-person limit on indoor gatherings in March, and did not remove the cap even as many other European countries eased such restrictions after beating back the first wave. (Many are once again restricting gathering sizes after seeing a resurgence.) Plus, the country has a small household size and fewer multigenerational households compared with most of Europe, which further limits transmission and cluster possibilities. It kept schools fully open without distancing or masks, but only for children under 16, who are unlikely to be super-spreaders of this disease. Both transmission and illness risks go up with age, and Sweden went all online for higher-risk high-school and university students—the opposite of what we did in the United States. It also encouraged social-distancing, and closed down indoor places that failed to observe the rules. From an overdispersion and super-spreading point of view, Sweden would not necessarily be classified as among the most lax countries, but nor is it the most strict. It simply doesn’t deserve this oversize place in our debates assessing different strategies.

Worth adding here, I think ... with either thanks and/or apologies to DocSavage87 (not sure which ... maybe both)

[oregontim]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/adam_tooze/status/1317057708273651713?s=20[/tweet]



There is one outlier in this correlation: Sweden.  And obviously, the big difference is that Sweden did resisted putting in lockdowns.  Your thoughts on Sweden will depend on whether you believe that had Sweden imposed harsh lockdowns it would have done little to stem the deaths and would have pushed the economic hit more akin to the UK or Spain, or if it had imposed more restrictions, it would have prevented deaths and Sweden would have looked a lot more like Denmark, Finland, or Norway.

BC

Excellent post, BC, the plot itself is fascinating. I'd love to see the US compared.

And there's a nice coincidence today with what was posted in the Overlooked variable ... thread by DocSavage87, looking specifically at results in Sweden and why they might differ so much ... the quote he includes in his post there is as follows:

Once we recognize super-spreading as a key lever, countries that look as if they were too relaxed in some aspects appear very different, and our usual polarized debates about the pandemic are scrambled, too. Take Sweden, an alleged example of the great success or the terrible failure of herd immunity without lockdowns, depending on whom you ask. In reality, although Sweden joins many other countries in failing to protect elderly populations in congregate-living facilities, its measures that target super-spreading have been stricter than many other European countries. Although it did not have a complete lockdown, as Kucharski pointed out to me, Sweden imposed a 50-person limit on indoor gatherings in March, and did not remove the cap even as many other European countries eased such restrictions after beating back the first wave. (Many are once again restricting gathering sizes after seeing a resurgence.) Plus, the country has a small household size and fewer multigenerational households compared with most of Europe, which further limits transmission and cluster possibilities. It kept schools fully open without distancing or masks, but only for children under 16, who are unlikely to be super-spreaders of this disease. Both transmission and illness risks go up with age, and Sweden went all online for higher-risk high-school and university students—the opposite of what we did in the United States. It also encouraged social-distancing, and closed down indoor places that failed to observe the rules. From an overdispersion and super-spreading point of view, Sweden would not necessarily be classified as among the most lax countries, but nor is it the most strict. It simply doesn’t deserve this oversize place in our debates assessing different strategies.

Worth adding here, I think ... with either thanks and/or apologies to DocSavage87 (not sure which ... maybe both)

[BostonCard]

We would look a lot like Sweden.  GDP in the US contracted 10.1% in the first half of the year, while we have had about 670 deaths/million population through mid-October.

BC

[BostonCard]

We would look a lot like Sweden.  GDP in the US contracted 10.1% in the first half of the year, while we have had about 670 deaths/million population through mid-October.

BC

[Mick]

What would really make that graph interesting is if they related it to the prior time period's GDP adjustment.

[Mick]

What would really make that graph interesting is if they related it to the prior time period's GDP adjustment.

[JustAnotherFan]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/adam_tooze/status/1317057708273651713?s=20[/tweet]

This is an interesting plot.  There is generally an inverse correlation between how many deaths a country (per capita) has had and how much its economy has declined.  That's not a surprise, when countries are overwhelmed with COVID deaths, people are going to stay home, and governments react by imposing severe lockdowns.

There is one outlier in this correlation: Sweden.  And obviously, the big difference is that Sweden did resisted putting in lockdowns.  Your thoughts on Sweden will depend on whether you believe that had Sweden imposed harsh lockdowns it would have done little to stem the deaths and would have pushed the economic hit more akin to the UK or Spain, or if it had imposed more restrictions, it would have prevented deaths and Sweden would have looked a lot more like Denmark, Finland, or Norway.

My opinion is that early and decisive action (even if it was short of a complete lockdown) did a lot to stem rising case counts and deaths and allowed countries like Germany, Denmark, Norway and Sweden to escape the large number of deaths seen in Italy, Spain, and the UK, and also not have the economic hit caused by both individual choices and strict lockdowns imposed from above.

BC

Instead of saying "Sweden has suffered less economic pain than many other EU countries --  but at a high human cost," they should have said "Sweden has suffered more deaths with no/negligible economic benefit relative to peer countries."

[JustAnotherFan]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/adam_tooze/status/1317057708273651713?s=20[/tweet]

This is an interesting plot.  There is generally an inverse correlation between how many deaths a country (per capita) has had and how much its economy has declined.  That's not a surprise, when countries are overwhelmed with COVID deaths, people are going to stay home, and governments react by imposing severe lockdowns.

There is one outlier in this correlation: Sweden.  And obviously, the big difference is that Sweden did resisted putting in lockdowns.  Your thoughts on Sweden will depend on whether you believe that had Sweden imposed harsh lockdowns it would have done little to stem the deaths and would have pushed the economic hit more akin to the UK or Spain, or if it had imposed more restrictions, it would have prevented deaths and Sweden would have looked a lot more like Denmark, Finland, or Norway.

My opinion is that early and decisive action (even if it was short of a complete lockdown) did a lot to stem rising case counts and deaths and allowed countries like Germany, Denmark, Norway and Sweden to escape the large number of deaths seen in Italy, Spain, and the UK, and also not have the economic hit caused by both individual choices and strict lockdowns imposed from above.

BC

Instead of saying "Sweden has suffered less economic pain than many other EU countries --  but at a high human cost," they should have said "Sweden has suffered more deaths with no/negligible economic benefit relative to peer countries."

[BostonCard]

Here’s the plot with a bunch of other countries added, including the US.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/florihas/status/1317930230837903366?s=21[/tweet]

BC

[BostonCard]

Here’s the plot with a bunch of other countries added, including the US.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/florihas/status/1317930230837903366?s=21[/tweet]

BC

[oregontim]

Here’s the plot with a bunch of other countries added, including the US.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/florihas/status/1317930230837903366?s=21[/tweet]

BC

What am I missing? For the US on the plot, the horizontal seems right but for the vertical, how are we down only 10% for the first half of the year? Didn't the US GDP decline 5% first quarter and 30+% second quarter?

[oregontim]

Here’s the plot with a bunch of other countries added, including the US.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/florihas/status/1317930230837903366?s=21[/tweet]

BC

What am I missing? For the US on the plot, the horizontal seems right but for the vertical, how are we down only 10% for the first half of the year? Didn't the US GDP decline 5% first quarter and 30+% second quarter?

[BostonCard]

What am I missing? For the US on the plot, the horizontal seems right but for the vertical, how are we down only 10% for the first half of the year? Didn't the US GDP decline 5% first quarter and 30+% second quarter?

The US annualizes GDP changes, so that any change is projected to what it would be if sustained for a year.  So, a GDP loss of 32% in the second quarter means that GDP was about 8% lower than the first quarter (it actually comes out to 9.2% because of the math involved).  The bottom line is that the GDP in the first half of 2020 was about 10% lower than it had been in the last half of 2019.

BC

[BostonCard]

What am I missing? For the US on the plot, the horizontal seems right but for the vertical, how are we down only 10% for the first half of the year? Didn't the US GDP decline 5% first quarter and 30+% second quarter?

The US annualizes GDP changes, so that any change is projected to what it would be if sustained for a year.  So, a GDP loss of 32% in the second quarter means that GDP was about 8% lower than the first quarter (it actually comes out to 9.2% because of the math involved).  The bottom line is that the GDP in the first half of 2020 was about 10% lower than it had been in the last half of 2019.

BC

[magnus]

For more FT covid analysis,  checkout the link in this thread.  
https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=20666

Apologies, the thread isn't well commented, but there is a good link.  =)

[magnus]

For more FT covid analysis,  checkout the link in this thread.  
https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=20666

Apologies, the thread isn't well commented, but there is a good link.  =)

[chrisk]

Six months from now, Americans will be debating how fast to reopen the economy and society which will still be far from normal.

Meanwhile, China has already been operating close to normal for many months already.

Americans have been unwilling to take short-term "medicine" and our dragging the pandemic out seemingly endlessly.
As was discussed early on, the cumulative economic cost of the American approach is likely to be many times the cost of a more disciplined approach to controlling the virus.

[chrisk]

Six months from now, Americans will be debating how fast to reopen the economy and society which will still be far from normal.

Meanwhile, China has already been operating close to normal for many months already.

Americans have been unwilling to take short-term "medicine" and our dragging the pandemic out seemingly endlessly.
As was discussed early on, the cumulative economic cost of the American approach is likely to be many times the cost of a more disciplined approach to controlling the virus.

[teejers1]

Six months from now, Americans will be debating how fast to reopen the economy and society which will still be far from normal.

Meanwhile, China has already been operating close to normal for many months already.

Americans have been unwilling to take short-term "medicine" and our dragging the pandemic out seemingly endlessly.
As was discussed early on, the cumulative economic cost of the American approach is likely to be many times the cost of a more disciplined approach to controlling the virus.

Yes, Chris, we should model our behavior on China who has done so well combatting the virus.  
It's a complete mystery why we can't be more like China.  
Regardless, it's an embarrassing shame . . .

[teejers1]

Six months from now, Americans will be debating how fast to reopen the economy and society which will still be far from normal.

Meanwhile, China has already been operating close to normal for many months already.

Americans have been unwilling to take short-term "medicine" and our dragging the pandemic out seemingly endlessly.
As was discussed early on, the cumulative economic cost of the American approach is likely to be many times the cost of a more disciplined approach to controlling the virus.

Yes, Chris, we should model our behavior on China who has done so well combatting the virus.  
It's a complete mystery why we can't be more like China.  
Regardless, it's an embarrassing shame . . .

[BostonCard]

More on Sweden versus the other Nordic countries:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/jmhorp/status/1321103412012838912?s=20[/tweet]

Because of their different baseline unemployment, it's a bit of Apples to Oranges, but it sure looks like Sweden's jump from 7 to 9% unemployment exceeded that of the other countries (Finland, Denmark, and Norway, whose unemployment increased a little more than 1% each.

Really hard to argue that Sweden's policy involved "saving" the economy in exchange for a higher death rate.

BC

[BostonCard]

More on Sweden versus the other Nordic countries:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/jmhorp/status/1321103412012838912?s=20[/tweet]

Because of their different baseline unemployment, it's a bit of Apples to Oranges, but it sure looks like Sweden's jump from 7 to 9% unemployment exceeded that of the other countries (Finland, Denmark, and Norway, whose unemployment increased a little more than 1% each.

Really hard to argue that Sweden's policy involved "saving" the economy in exchange for a higher death rate.

BC

[Farm93]

Six months from now, Americans will be debating how fast to reopen the economy and society which will still be far from normal.

Meanwhile, China has already been operating close to normal for many months already.

Americans have been unwilling to take short-term "medicine" and our dragging the pandemic out seemingly endlessly.
As was discussed early on, the cumulative economic cost of the American approach is likely to be many times the cost of a more disciplined approach to controlling the virus.

Yes, Chris, we should model our behavior on China who has done so well combatting the virus.  
It's a complete mystery why we can't be more like China.  
Regardless, it's an embarrassing shame . . .

We didn't need to be more like China.

We could have been more like Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, S Korea, Japan or even Vietnam.  They too embraced decisive early action rather than wait for the morgues to overflow before realizing that maybe this COVID19 thing could be a problem for health and economic prosperity.

They each opted for a few months of near universal mask wearing and now are benefiting economically while others flounder.
We opted for the easier mask-free path supported by trillions of dollars in debt and a quarter of a million deaths.

[Farm93]

Six months from now, Americans will be debating how fast to reopen the economy and society which will still be far from normal.

Meanwhile, China has already been operating close to normal for many months already.

Americans have been unwilling to take short-term "medicine" and our dragging the pandemic out seemingly endlessly.
As was discussed early on, the cumulative economic cost of the American approach is likely to be many times the cost of a more disciplined approach to controlling the virus.

Yes, Chris, we should model our behavior on China who has done so well combatting the virus.  
It's a complete mystery why we can't be more like China.  
Regardless, it's an embarrassing shame . . .

We didn't need to be more like China.

We could have been more like Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, S Korea, Japan or even Vietnam.  They too embraced decisive early action rather than wait for the morgues to overflow before realizing that maybe this COVID19 thing could be a problem for health and economic prosperity.

They each opted for a few months of near universal mask wearing and now are benefiting economically while others flounder.
We opted for the easier mask-free path supported by trillions of dollars in debt and a quarter of a million deaths.

[BostonCard]

Even Uruguay, Germany, or Canada would have been a substantial improvement (probably 100,000 lives saved).

BC

[BostonCard]

Even Uruguay, Germany, or Canada would have been a substantial improvement (probably 100,000 lives saved).

BC

[M T]

Or like Santa Clara County...

[M T]

Or like Santa Clara County...

[Goose]

They each opted for a few months of near universal mask wearing and now are benefiting economically while others flounder.
We opted for the easier mask-free path supported by trillions of dollars in debt and a quarter of a million deaths.

I think it is a seriously misleading assertion that the only (or even the main) difference between the responses in Korea, Vietnam, etc. and the USA was "a few months of mask wearing". These nations did (and are still doing) much, much more than that. In particular, they have significant and effective contact tracking/tracing operation and they ENFORCE the quarantine/isolation requirements. That is IMHO much more significant than masks. It simply isn't even remotely true that the USA would have a similar case load as these countries if we just wore masks and still retained all the other unsafe behaviors. Yes, masks help, but they are nowhere near a silver bullet. Getting sick people out of the population is what has worked for these nations. They can do that because people are complying with ALL the regulations/suggestions (social distancing, cooperation with contact tracing, quarantine and isolation when ordered, and yes, masks).

[Goose]

They each opted for a few months of near universal mask wearing and now are benefiting economically while others flounder.
We opted for the easier mask-free path supported by trillions of dollars in debt and a quarter of a million deaths.

I think it is a seriously misleading assertion that the only (or even the main) difference between the responses in Korea, Vietnam, etc. and the USA was "a few months of mask wearing". These nations did (and are still doing) much, much more than that. In particular, they have significant and effective contact tracking/tracing operation and they ENFORCE the quarantine/isolation requirements. That is IMHO much more significant than masks. It simply isn't even remotely true that the USA would have a similar case load as these countries if we just wore masks and still retained all the other unsafe behaviors. Yes, masks help, but they are nowhere near a silver bullet. Getting sick people out of the population is what has worked for these nations. They can do that because people are complying with ALL the regulations/suggestions (social distancing, cooperation with contact tracing, quarantine and isolation when ordered, and yes, masks).

[Farm93]

They each opted for a few months of near universal mask wearing and now are benefiting economically while others flounder.
We opted for the easier mask-free path supported by trillions of dollars in debt and a quarter of a million deaths.

I think it is a seriously misleading assertion that the only (or even the main) difference between the responses in Korea, Vietnam, etc. and the USA was "a few months of mask wearing". These nations did (and are still doing) much, much more than that. In particular, they have significant and effective contact tracking/tracing operation and they ENFORCE the quarantine/isolation requirements. That is IMHO much more significant than masks. It simply isn't even remotely true that the USA would have a similar case load as these countries if we just wore masks and still retained all the other unsafe behaviors. Yes, masks help, but they are nowhere near a silver bullet. Getting sick people out of the population is what has worked for these nations. They can do that because people are complying with ALL the regulations/suggestions (social distancing, cooperation with contact tracing, quarantine and isolation when ordered, and yes, masks).

Yes, they did a lot more than wear masks, especially at the government level, but the point was they did what needed to be done early.   And now they are going to have fewer deaths AND a thriving economy.  For the most part, Thailand, Vietnam, Japan and Korea tested, masked, and sprayed and they did that before cases got a foothold. 

The citizens in Vietnam and Thailand, in particular, really didn't do more than we did in CA to be honest.  There is a lot in the cultures, the favorable climates, and a whole lot of respect for the potential pandemics.    

Here in the USA we've been given a false choice for months.   Fight COVID hard OR have a thriving economy.   And we have a mountain of debt creating a sugar high for the economy and far too many fatalities even relative to slow responding peers in western nations.  The deal was, and still remains, that economies can't thrive if COVID is lurking and thriving in their land.

Oh well, our relevant comps would not have been that Asia group because it would have been almost impossible for a POTUS to get citizen compliance in the USA before deaths were visible, and POTUS45 was definitely not going to ask citizens to take any very difficult steps early. 

Germany and Canada likely are closer to our best case.   Slower to appreciate the seriousness of the situation, but once aware they were quick to use a combination of science, technology and medicine to keep some level of control.  Sadly, we do not appear to be ready to join that potential peer group either. 

IIWII

[Farm93]

They each opted for a few months of near universal mask wearing and now are benefiting economically while others flounder.
We opted for the easier mask-free path supported by trillions of dollars in debt and a quarter of a million deaths.

I think it is a seriously misleading assertion that the only (or even the main) difference between the responses in Korea, Vietnam, etc. and the USA was "a few months of mask wearing". These nations did (and are still doing) much, much more than that. In particular, they have significant and effective contact tracking/tracing operation and they ENFORCE the quarantine/isolation requirements. That is IMHO much more significant than masks. It simply isn't even remotely true that the USA would have a similar case load as these countries if we just wore masks and still retained all the other unsafe behaviors. Yes, masks help, but they are nowhere near a silver bullet. Getting sick people out of the population is what has worked for these nations. They can do that because people are complying with ALL the regulations/suggestions (social distancing, cooperation with contact tracing, quarantine and isolation when ordered, and yes, masks).

Yes, they did a lot more than wear masks, especially at the government level, but the point was they did what needed to be done early.   And now they are going to have fewer deaths AND a thriving economy.  For the most part, Thailand, Vietnam, Japan and Korea tested, masked, and sprayed and they did that before cases got a foothold. 

The citizens in Vietnam and Thailand, in particular, really didn't do more than we did in CA to be honest.  There is a lot in the cultures, the favorable climates, and a whole lot of respect for the potential pandemics.    

Here in the USA we've been given a false choice for months.   Fight COVID hard OR have a thriving economy.   And we have a mountain of debt creating a sugar high for the economy and far too many fatalities even relative to slow responding peers in western nations.  The deal was, and still remains, that economies can't thrive if COVID is lurking and thriving in their land.

Oh well, our relevant comps would not have been that Asia group because it would have been almost impossible for a POTUS to get citizen compliance in the USA before deaths were visible, and POTUS45 was definitely not going to ask citizens to take any very difficult steps early. 

Germany and Canada likely are closer to our best case.   Slower to appreciate the seriousness of the situation, but once aware they were quick to use a combination of science, technology and medicine to keep some level of control.  Sadly, we do not appear to be ready to join that potential peer group either. 

IIWII