Rants and WTF are you talking about and Coronavirus!

Not nationalistic.

It is about economic rationality.

It was early well known which people were in the risk group of Covid-19: old people with underlying diseases like hypertension, diabetes, heart- and lung-problems.

A clever strategy would be to keep society open and focus on protection of the risk groups.

Anyway, politicians like Macron chose to isolate young and healthy people and slaughter the whole society, because "other countries did the same" or "China told us to lock-down".
"If all others do the same, then this strategy must be the correct one".
But here, China has a Hidden Agenda. China wants US and Europe to lock down, in order to get an economic lead.

Many European and US firms - as in the automobile sector - will soon wake up and find themselves in a real bad position.

There is absolutely no previous experience of total lock-down and the consequences of such a non-clever strategy.
Anyway, this extremely risky strategy has been applied.
It is not possible to pause the whole economy like an X-Box game, and then believe that everything will work as usual.
Important. Unemployment will cause deaths too, in the form of suicides, mental health and alcoholism. Often people with many remaining years to live will die. But these deaths are more abstract.

As I have written, Swedish Government made severe mistakes by not isolating risk groups at retirement homes.
Visits to elderly people at retirement homes were forbidden on April 1.
Secondary schools and universities - with no risk groups - were closed on March 17 ! Compare!
Sports arenas were closed even earlier.

When Swedish people returned from Austria and Italy in February, those working in Government administration (e.g. Departments, Central bank and different authorites) were sent home.
But returning people who worked at hospitals or retirement homes were not sent home! Not very clever.

I do not have any faith whatsoever for these immunity-tests performed in Sweden.
Huge numbers have been sick with Corona-symptoms in the period February-May in Sweden.
I also know people that have tested positive for immunity. But only those who were sick the last weeks. Not those that were sick in February and March.
We do not know which level of antibodies a person must possess to get a positive test result. Several tests have circulated in Sweden the last months.

[QUOTE=DeltaIndigo;2453106]About one point, I would differ, I do know a lot about Stockholm, since I had lived there for over 3 years, but this was a long time ago. Your response is quite measured and temperate, however the arguments I have heard from others are really not rationale and are based upon certain tenets of faith. Well I am familiar with this blind faith and confidence which is inspired by nationalist feelings.

I would just gently say this, about comparing to neighboring countries with similar climates and population densities (Denmark's is a lot higher though) you can see what the differing mortality rates from a severe vs a very relaxed lock down could be, really the fairest test would be the exact same environment, but this is obviously not possible.

The level of immunity should be higher in societies which have a more relaxed or no lock down, however it seems that in every systematic test in every place these numbers are far lower than the proponents of herd immunity have advocated. Some studies say it is up to 20% in New York, that could only be the case given its very high urban density, it would be far lower in LOS Angeles (I know both cities quite well) given the lock down in both places, I these the North American lock downs are far less strict than the European ones.

I would expect Sweden to have more people who are immune, but thus far these numbers as verified by studies are still far too low and the prediction of herd immunity by June or August is premature.

The assertion that these tests are flawed and many more people are surely immune is unfortunately just a matter of faith in the absence of hard evidence.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=McGrath;2453130]First of all, everything about economics is wrong in that post. Sweden doesn't gain any GDP towards other countries because they are a little more open for a few months. I first came to Frankfurt because of the banks were there so I know some things about this.

Sweden is a small open economy with a floating currency, in the long view, how the rest of the world goes Sweden will go.

And the notion that Sweden is the only country that can count dead people the right way is ridicoulus.[/QUOTE]I have never written that Sweden gain any GDP towards other countries because they are a little more open for a few months.
Did you mix the posts?

If lock-down is a clever strategy that do not harm the economy.
Why not locking down the economy for 2-3 years?
Future will show if Sweden or Spain / Italy / France will beg for money and loans from EU / ECB.

I never said that only Sweden counts Corona-dead people the right way.
I said that countries count in different ways.
In such case, comparing statistics with reported Corona-deaths between countries is worthless.

The only accurate way to compare countries is to count "excess deaths".
How many died this year compared to previous years.

[QUOTE=RockyV;2453084]Excess deaths can only be observed after the virus has disappeared, not after a 'second wave, which nobody wants to happen. It is still relevant to compare deaths with covid-infected patients under an epidemiological and medical point of view.

Virus may become attenuated (I. E. Weaker) like Spanish flu and remain in the population without the need of a vaccine. It may also disappear like with Sars. There are many ways in which a pandemic can end, not only through a vaccine, which remains the best and quickest way though!

Let me understand here, you want to take Belarus as a credible example in support of the Swedish approach to the pandemic. Belarus? A country, whose president said he doesn't believe in the pandemic because, and I quote, 'he does not see Covid fly in the air'? Really Arnold?

In addition, the vulnerable groups are NOT only elderly people with underlying conditions, but also all other people with respiratory diseases (including Asthma, COPD, CF etc.) all those recovering from cancer treatment, people of all ages with cardiovascular and kidney conditions and I stopped here because the list would be too long. There was absolutely no way of knowing the most vulnerable groups at the beginning of the pandemic because it was a brand new virus and, even now, we still do not fully understand how it works. DO NOT SPREAD FAKE NEWS and listen to the experts.

Sweden have chosen to avoid the lockdown and they now have almost 4000 deaths (or 389 every 1 M people) after having done 20,000 tests every 1 M people. Other countries with similar population size like Czechia, which closed down very early in the epidemic, they have 29 deaths every 1 M people) after having done 36,000 tests every 1 M people.

Sweden has taken a gamble and now they are counting corpses.[/QUOTE]

Statistics on reported Corona-death are not comparable between countries. Countries count deaths in different ways.
Also take account of number of infected. And wait for the second wave. It will happen. You apparantly did not take account of that in your biased statistics.

More than 93 % of dead people in Sweden are older than 70 years. Average age of Corona-deaths: 81 years.
Almost all have at least one underlying disease.

Why then isolating young and healthy people and killing healthy firms?

More clever to let society be open and protect risk groups.

NO.
The Big Gamble is to lock down the whole economy.
Nobody (neither you) knows the consequences of this, since it has never been applied before during any pandemic.
Your main argument is "Everybody else locked down, so it must be the correct strategy".

Did you take account of the health consequences of mass-unemployment?

Please, stop spreading Fake News.
China does this every day to get economic advantages.

[QUOTE=ShooBree;2453092]I'm amazed that people can write about strategies against the Coronavirus without even mentioning the economy!

If the only single goal was to lower the number of deaths caused by see-19 all countries would still be in quarantine!

What Bolsonaro understands is that a lockdown would completely butcher the Brazilian economy! He's afraid of the consequences of a lockdown! He is looking one step further, being smarter, than people screaming in fear because of a virus. I'm extremely disappointed by the other political leaders. It will be rough for us in Nothern Europe, rougher for those in the South and a catastrophe for Brazil. 40 million unemployed in the US, but let's act as if there will be no consequences.

I've been reading comments that without a lockdown everyone will die or half of all people will die. Today we can easily dismiss those claims as scaremongering.

So how many would die? I don't know. No one knows. In Sweden we have 59 deaths among people under 50 years, is that much? I don't think so considering the consequences of a lockdown. This virus is killing the people that pretty much could die from anything.

I would love to blast our government for their incompetence, because they truly are incompetent, but no lockdown was a great and courageous decision to take. It's got nothing to do with nationalism, it was simply the right thing to do in my opinion.

In other countries people have too much of a sunk cost to admit or even entertain the thought that they might have been better off without a lockdown. That in combination with populistic politicians, the media and scared / dumb people lead to the acceptance of a lockdown.

As said, it's not about nationalism.[/QUOTE]Very well written.

I fully agree with you.

The health and economic consequences of mass unemployment due to lock-down will become several times larger than the health consequences of the Covid19-virus.

[QUOTE=Arnold15;2453141]Statistics on reported Corona-death are not comparable between countries. Countries count deaths in different ways.
Also take account of number of infected. And wait for the second wave. It will happen. You apparantly did not take account of that in your biased statistics.

More than 93 % of dead people in Sweden are older than 70 years. Average age of Corona-deaths: 81 years.
Almost all have at least one underlying disease.

Why then isolating young and healthy people and killing healthy firms?

More clever to let society be open and protect risk groups.

NO.
The Big Gamble is to lock down the whole economy.
Nobody (neither you) knows the consequences of this, since it has never been applied before during any pandemic.
Your main argument is "Everybody else locked down, so it must be the correct strategy".

Did you take account of the health consequences of mass-unemployment?

Please, stop spreading Fake News.
China does this every day to get economic advantages.[/QUOTE]The methodology and accuracy of the count is not exactly the same between any two different countries, however similar countries should be broadly in line. In this case however, Sweden and Czechia, the discrepancy is so damn huge, that it would be all but impossible for Czechia to not have a dramatically lower death toll at current (I am not speaking about herd immunity or the hypothetical second wave).

When the figures are this far apart and the fact that figures from Czechia have far more integrity than Belarus, China or Russia, their death toll and infection rate has been undoubtedly lower. Yes, no 2 countries use the exact same methodology and capture data the same way, however when the discrepancy is so incredibly large the conclusion is beyond dispute.

Let the asympomatic roam free and live off their recent ancestors nest egg. Since they have an insufficient education in most countries it's only a matter of time before they exhaust their funds at the discos and realize it's time to hunt down the rich. One person in South Korea was traced back from 215 infections spread over 5 bars. The crumbs led back to Grandma's house where the big bad Wolf 🐺 devoured her. Betsy Devos will make sure the for profit colleges get their dough for the insufficient education provided to Hansel and Gretel. It was a gruesome story when written and later sanitized to mask the ugly truth. Thank Steven Munchkin and Kamala Harris for all those home foreclosures in California, suckers. Just call me argumentative.

[QUOTE=Beijing4987;2453148]Thank Steven Munchkin and Kamala Harris for all those home foreclosures in California, suckers.[/QUOTE]Yes, let us blame Steve Munchkin! There the little culprit is in the middle with a couple of his cronies!

[QUOTE=Arnold15;2453141]Statistics on reported Corona-death are not comparable between countries. Countries count deaths in different ways.
Also take account of number of infected. And wait for the second wave. It will happen. You apparantly did not take account of that in your biased statistics.

More than 93 % of dead people in Sweden are older than 70 years. Average age of Corona-deaths: 81 years.
Almost all have at least one underlying disease.

Why then isolating young and healthy people and killing healthy firms?

More clever to let society be open and protect risk groups.

NO..[/QUOTE]I have never said to isolate the young and healthy, but I was correcting you in just having the elderly with underlying conditions as the vulnerable group.

Cases in Sweden are likely underestimated as their test rates are still very low.

Sweden economy will suffer as much as the rest of Europe, according to some analysts in FT: [URL]https://www.ft.com/content/93105160-dcb4-4721-9e58-a7b262cd4b6e[/URL] and this makes me wonder, why pay a high death toll then.

Finally, I want to make one thing very clear here as I may have come across a bit harsh earlier: I absolutely love Sweden, the Swedish people and food but I think they could have done more in this case to save lives. That's all.

Rock.

[QUOTE=Arnold15;2453046]Statistics on REPORTED Corona-deaths in Sweden comapring with other countries is WORTHLESS.

It simply depends on that different countries identify real reasons to deaths in different ways.
Here, Belgium and Sweden are top countries since they identify the death reason - other countries (like France) do not.

The only way to calculate Corona-death are as follows:
Number of dead in April 2020 divided by average number of dead in April 2015-19.

Then you get how many percent died more than normal.
And this figure in Sweden is not higher 2020 than 1993, when there was a severe influence.
Comapring period February - May in Sweden 2020 with 2018, then only 1700 more dead people in 2020!
Almost all of them multi-dicesease and average age of 81!.[/QUOTE]I didn't read here people die in Stockholm streets, but I wrote Stockholm is worst deaths rate with more than 1000 deaths, competing with NYC where we could see fridge trucks in streets, full of dead, and also Hart island. We will see for second wave, if it happens, let's try just to be able to control first one.

[QUOTE=Arnold15;2453135]Anyway, politicians like Macron chose to isolate young and healthy people and slaughter the whole society, because "other countries did the same" or "China told us to lock-down".
"If all others do the same, then this strategy must be the correct one".
But here, China has a Hidden Agenda. China wants US and Europe to lock down, in order to get an economic lead.

Many European and US firms - as in the automobile sector - will soon wake up and find themselves in a real bad position.[/QUOTE]China was the first to sacrifice their economy by implementing national lockdown. They had no way of predicting with 100 percent certainty if any other country would follow suit. The only thing that they could have maybe predicted was that countries with a one-party-system would be more efficient at containing the crisis and getting compliance from the populace.

The fundamental problem is almost every country underestimated the threat. Vietnam is the notable exception. I believe their national lockdown only lasted between two and three weeks. On paper, Vietnam should have been one of the worse-hit battlefields for the war against the coronavirus. Brazil, USA, Europe, and Russia all have significantly more financial resources. And being farther from the Wuhan epicenter, all these countries had significantly more time to prepare for the virus. With the exception of masks and the strict controls of the borders, daily life in Vietnam is already back to normal, even in Saigon which has two of the most population dense districts in the world.

So here is the sad lesson: if all of the Western countries had (1) taken action early, and (2) implemented a super-strict lockdown where 97 percent of population did not leave the house, not only would fewer lives have been lost but the economy would have only needed to be closed for 2-3 weeks. As I mentioned before, many Western European countries practically close their economy the entire month of August as is. And countries like France, with the amount of protesting they do, even more.

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_city_districts_by_population_density[/URL]

[QUOTE=McAdonis;2453375]China was the first to sacrifice their economy by implementing national lockdown. They had no way of predicting with 100 percent certainty if any other country would follow suit. The only thing that they could have maybe predicted was that countries with a one-party-system would be more efficient at containing the crisis and getting compliance from the populace.

The fundamental problem is almost every country underestimated the threat. Vietnam is the notable exception. I believe their national lockdown only lasted between two and three weeks. On paper, Vietnam should have been one of the worse-hit battlefields for the war against the coronavirus. Brazil, USA, Europe, and Russia all have significantly more financial resources. And being farther from the Wuhan epicenter, all these countries had significantly more time to prepare for the virus. With the exception of masks and the strict controls of the borders, daily life in Vietnam is already back to normal, even in Saigon which has two of the most population dense districts in the world.

So here is the sad lesson: if all of the Western countries had (1) taken action early, and (2) implemented a super-strict lockdown where 97 percent of population did not leave the house, not only would fewer lives have been lost but the economy would have only needed to be closed for 2-3 weeks. As I mentioned before, many Western European countries practically close their economy the entire month of August as is. And countries like France, with the amount of protesting they do, even more.

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_city_districts_by_population_density[/URL][/QUOTE]France don't stop economy on August, just slowlier, because sun and 3 beautiful seas in France, making most visited country and Paris for most visited city even no sea. I won't say Macron is a good president because he is not good enough for arithmetic, but he is not crazy like Trump and tried at least to save life without eating chloroquine bonbons, confined saved more than 60 000 life, double than our deaths. Multi cultural with different religions French are very different from Germany or Sweden, but except in some difficult places, French respected quite well confined, even they thought about holidays at the beginning. If we understand we need to protect our health and safety, we have level of quality in France to go on, even I don't think putting more tax on rich will help economy to restart.

[QUOTE=McAdonis;2453375]China was the first to sacrifice their economy by implementing national lockdown. They had no way of predicting with 100 percent certainty if any other country would follow suit. The only thing that they could have maybe predicted was that countries with a one-party-system would be more efficient at containing the crisis and getting compliance from the populace.

The fundamental problem is almost every country underestimated the threat. Vietnam is the notable exception. I believe their national lockdown only lasted between two and three weeks. On paper, Vietnam should have been one of the worse-hit battlefields for the war against the coronavirus. Brazil, USA, Europe, and Russia all have significantly more financial resources. And being farther from the Wuhan epicenter, all these countries had significantly more time to prepare for the virus. With the exception of masks and the strict controls of the borders, daily life in Vietnam is already back to normal, even in Saigon which has two of the most population dense districts in the world.

So here is the sad lesson: if all of the Western countries had (1) taken action early, and (2) implemented a super-strict lockdown where 97 percent of population did not leave the house, not only would fewer lives have been lost but the economy would have only needed to be closed for 2-3 weeks. As I mentioned before, many Western European countries practically close their economy the entire month of August as is. And countries like France, with the amount of protesting they do, even more.

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_city_districts_by_population_density[/URL][/QUOTE]You suggest that all countries should lock-down the whole economy 2-3 weeks. And then everything is OK. Virus is eliminated in the whole world.

No. It would not work.
It is a new virus and there is no vaccine.

Covid-19 would come in wave after wave (compare with Spanish disease, HongKong and Asian influence).
And then all countries need to lock-down 2-3 weeks every time. Maybe every 4th or 6th month?

Countries overestimated the danger of the virus.
Most people who have died by Covid-19 would die anyway within 1-2 years.
(compare: 200 000 - 1 000 000 people die every year by the annual influence)
Of course, there are exceptions, where also young people have died by covid-19, but they are in a clear minority.

The fundamental problem is that almost all countries have underestimated the economic damages AND long-term health damages of total lock-down.
Such total lock-downs have never been practised before.

Mass-unemployment and mass-bankrupsies will also kill people. Many small-firm owners will be ruined.
Huge increases in suicides, alcoholists, drug addicts.
Worse mental and physical health causing other diseases.
And above all, increased criminality (as a result of mass-unemployment) will be the consequences of these lock-downs.
And now we are talking of young people who are affected.

So the lesson to learn is as follows:
1) Let 90 % of the society work as usual.
2) Put all resources on protecting the risk groups. (Not in the Swedish incompetent way!)

As they say never waste a crisis.

Some Prominent German Politicians are using the current Covid 19 disaster to contact federal state leaders to bring in the Nordick Model!

Quelle Surprise!

[URL]https://www.dw.com/en/german-lawmakers-call-for-buying-sex-to-be-made-permanently-illegal/a-53504221[/URL]

This is particularly disgusting given that this disease has already horribly impacted on sex workers!

[QUOTE=Arnold15;2453555]The fundamental problem is that almost all countries have underestimated the economic damages AND long-term health damages of total lock-down.

Mass-unemployment and mass-bankrupsies will also kill people. Many small-firm owners will be ruined.
Huge increases in suicides, alcoholists, drug addicts.
Worse mental and physical health causing other diseases.
And above all, increased criminality (as a result of mass-unemployment) will be the consequences of these lock-downs.
And now we are talking of young people who are affected.[/QUOTE]Global lockdown, especially if it were to last longer than six months, results in significant economic damages. One does not need a degree in economics to understand this. The world has seen world wars that more or less approximate a global economic lockdown. What the world has never seen is a virus that doubles infection rates every three days, at least not since global air travel became so accessible and cheap.

I believe the damages you listed above are unavoidable, even if the lockdowns had not occurred, because even before the pandemic we were in the early stages of an automation revolution. The idea that everyone needs to be back at work for the economy to be healthy may prove to be an outdated idea by 2040. Working remotely and working fewer hours will soon be the norm, so this pandemic is just a practice test for the future. Do not get me wrong, it hurts and it is horrible, I am suffering a bit financially, but it was going to happen sooner or later. In 1837, the average work week in USA and Europe was between 69 to 94 hours. Now it is between 30 to 40 hours. In the future, it could be between 5 to 10 hours. At least in the initial years of this technological revolution, there will be civil unrest and perhaps violent extremism. There will be a mental health crisis as people face the frustration and rejection of being fired. With all the newfound free time, people will struggle with feelings of "uselessness". People will need to find new hobbies to stay sane or drown their sorrows. Perhaps we will see more people turning to prostitution for comfort. Nevertheless, all those automation projects that companies had planned for the future are being executed on now. Some companies are actually happy they were able to layoff workers during this pandemic. They see it as an opportunity to double down their investment on automation, which allows them to be more efficient and cost-effective.

[URL]https://www.seattletimes.com/business/robots-welcome-to-take-over-as-coronavirus-pandemic-accelerates-automation/[/URL]

[URL]https://web.archive.org/web/20140502004731/http://www.lorraine.direccte.gouv.fr/evolution-de-la-duree-du-travail-en-france-et-dans-le-monde[/URL]

[URL]https://thebulletin.brandtschool.de/why-covid-19-will-increase-automation-anxiety/[/URL]

[QUOTE=Arnold15;2453555]You suggest that all countries should lock-down the whole economy 2-3 weeks. And then everything is OK. Virus is eliminated in the whole world.

No. It would not work.
It is a new virus and there is no vaccine.

Covid-19 would come in wave after wave (compare with Spanish disease, HongKong and Asian influence).
And then all countries need to lock-down 2-3 weeks every time. Maybe every 4th or 6th month?
[/QUOTE]I will acknowledge it is not realistic, because every country would need to agree on a 2-3 week lockdown period. And not every country would be willing or capable of imposing a strict lockdown. But Vietnam has almost been able to eradicate the virus without a long lockdown period. Unlike China nobody distrusts their numbers. The problem is Vietnam is a small economy, so unfortunately they will have to reopen their borders to countries who weren't as diligent with containment.

[QUOTE]"If it were possible to wave a magic wand and make all Americans freeze in place for 14 days while sitting six feet apart, epidemiologists say, the whole epidemic would sputter to a halt. The virus would die out on every contaminated surface and, because almost everyone shows symptoms within two weeks, it would be evident who was infected. If we had enough tests for every American, even the completely asymptomatic cases could be found and isolated. The crisis would be over. Obviously, there is no magic wand, and no 300 million tests. But the goal of lockdowns and social distancing is to approximate such a total freeze."

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/health/coronavirus-restrictions-us.html.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Arnold15;2453555]You suggest that all countries should lock-down the whole economy 2-3 weeks. And then everything is OK. Virus is eliminated in the whole world.

No. It would not work.
It is a new virus and there is no vaccine.

Covid-19 would come in wave after wave (compare with Spanish disease, HongKong and Asian influence).
And then all countries need to lock-down 2-3 weeks every time. Maybe every 4th or 6th month?

Countries overestimated the danger of the virus.
Most people who have died by Covid-19 would die anyway within 1-2 years.
(compare: 200 000 - 1 000 000 people die every year by the annual influence)
Of course, there are exceptions, where also young people have died by covid-19, but they are in a clear minority.
[/QUOTE]I mostly agree with you that a more precise approach could have been made without a near complete shut down of society, but how could that have been done? Yes, this disease is extremely hard on the old but from just eyeballing the patients I've treated in my intensive care units, at least half of the patients were between 45 and 65. Also, looking only at fatalities may not be the most prudent approach. While many of the younger will not die, for those who survive, being hospitalized for over a month or more is nothing to scoff off. We can isolate the old, but are we going to add the middle aged and obese to that isolation group also? Because after age, obesity is really the most fatal comorbidity out there.

Also, previous post that claimed that China intentionally released the virus to get ahead economically seems pretty ill founded and pretty Trumpish in it's hate mongering tone. I mean, speculation is one thing, but assertion in such a pre-convinced tone is a rather "internet" of you.