[stupac2]

The Spanish Flu hit during our involvement in World War 1 so I don't think that is a useful comparison.

Why is that?  Yes, there was a war on, and there was a pandemic on. Why does that make a difference. The US economy at the time continued to grow, before and after. 
http://www.usstuckonstupid.com/sos_downc...e=&color=c

I don't understand why our economy can't at least remain strong.  If (when) I fall, there's five more to take my place, it's like that in most companies.  Our current solution will lead to 60 million unemployed, per St. Louis Fed Governor.  I question the wisdom of the draconian steps we've taken.

Current ratio of 2020 initial unemployment claims to US coronavirus deaths: (12,144,000/8,350)* dead as of 4/4 at 5:43 eastern:  1,454 jobs lost per death. 

1,454 families out of work, unable to pay the rent, unable to buy food, completely screwed.  But at least one fat old person, exactly like me, with hypertension, coronary disease and pulmonary disease gets to live.

WHAT DO YOU ACTUALLY WANT TO DO???

Unless you're willing to actually say what you actually want to, then just stop it. It's getting annoying just having you be a Statler over here complaining about everything sucks while offering absolutely nothing useful. Oh gee, thanks for the brilliant observation that this is going to cause pain. SO WILL EVERY OTHER OPTION. What's your reaction to my link containing a survey of economists where they're unanimous that ending restrictions early will cause MORE pain? Silence. Naturally. You cite the Kobayashi Maru but apparently don't seem to be willing to learn the actual lesson from it, which is grace in the face of adversity. If you want to have a constructive conversation then post what you actually want to do. If you just want to vent, do it elsewhere.



I genuinely don't understand why this is so hard for people to understand. If you don't shut down early, you get a bigger explosion and more deaths and all the same economic calamity you'd get otherwise. Just look at NY vs CA, or wait and see for some of these southern states in a few weeks. It's going to be ruinous beyond belief. As I said before, the options aren't "fine economy and lots of deaths" vs "bad economy and few deaths", it's "bad economy and lots of deaths" vs "bad economy and few deaths". Who in their right mind is going to pick the latter?

And if you think I'm wrong, give me something, anything, that justifies your position. Because literally everything I've found from reputable sources, from surveys of economists to studies of the 1918 epidemic, says that premature reaction that stops the disease transmission early is better economically. I'd love to know what makes you think the reaction we currently have is a bad idea.

[stupac2]

The Spanish Flu hit during our involvement in World War 1 so I don't think that is a useful comparison.

Why is that?  Yes, there was a war on, and there was a pandemic on. Why does that make a difference. The US economy at the time continued to grow, before and after. 
http://www.usstuckonstupid.com/sos_downc...e=&color=c

I don't understand why our economy can't at least remain strong.  If (when) I fall, there's five more to take my place, it's like that in most companies.  Our current solution will lead to 60 million unemployed, per St. Louis Fed Governor.  I question the wisdom of the draconian steps we've taken.

Current ratio of 2020 initial unemployment claims to US coronavirus deaths: (12,144,000/8,350)* dead as of 4/4 at 5:43 eastern:  1,454 jobs lost per death. 

1,454 families out of work, unable to pay the rent, unable to buy food, completely screwed.  But at least one fat old person, exactly like me, with hypertension, coronary disease and pulmonary disease gets to live.

WHAT DO YOU ACTUALLY WANT TO DO???

Unless you're willing to actually say what you actually want to, then just stop it. It's getting annoying just having you be a Statler over here complaining about everything sucks while offering absolutely nothing useful. Oh gee, thanks for the brilliant observation that this is going to cause pain. SO WILL EVERY OTHER OPTION. What's your reaction to my link containing a survey of economists where they're unanimous that ending restrictions early will cause MORE pain? Silence. Naturally. You cite the Kobayashi Maru but apparently don't seem to be willing to learn the actual lesson from it, which is grace in the face of adversity. If you want to have a constructive conversation then post what you actually want to do. If you just want to vent, do it elsewhere.



I genuinely don't understand why this is so hard for people to understand. If you don't shut down early, you get a bigger explosion and more deaths and all the same economic calamity you'd get otherwise. Just look at NY vs CA, or wait and see for some of these southern states in a few weeks. It's going to be ruinous beyond belief. As I said before, the options aren't "fine economy and lots of deaths" vs "bad economy and few deaths", it's "bad economy and lots of deaths" vs "bad economy and few deaths". Who in their right mind is going to pick the latter?

And if you think I'm wrong, give me something, anything, that justifies your position. Because literally everything I've found from reputable sources, from surveys of economists to studies of the 1918 epidemic, says that premature reaction that stops the disease transmission early is better economically. I'd love to know what makes you think the reaction we currently have is a bad idea.