Evidence over hysteria — COVID-19

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jen95 . . . .
What’s your definition of panic? People stocking up on toilet paper?
Click to expand...
I’m just not going to respond to a question asked like that. (It suggests to me you don’t really want an answer.)
 
Cathoholic said:
I’m just not going to respond to a question asked like that. (It suggests to me you don’t really want an answer.)
Click to expand...
Oh, I think it is a reasonable question. You often post 5 or 16 questions in a post for someone else. You could just be nice and answer Jen here.
 
Sarcasm requires that I point out the need to make this post quickly as it’s shelf life is limited
 
OraLabora said:
Another hack who doesn’t understand exponential spread?

With just a 1% infection rate, given that 5% of COVID-19 patients end up in the ICU, you will need 175,000 ICU beds. You might want to Google how many ICU beds there are in the US. Hint: it’s well under 175k.

Ask the Italians what happens when their ICU capacity is exceeded. Hint: if you’re over 60, you are left to die.
Click to expand...
I’m doubting you read the article since your retort didn’t address any points made by the article.

Yes, flattening the curve is essential to reduce the hospital overload.
 
What about entire industries effectively being closed and people being unable to feed their families for months at a time?

We are basically saying to some folks, you may end up homeless or starving when this is done, but that’s the way it has to be in order for us to take care of other people.

There is no perfect solution, but let’s not gloss over things and act like the worst case scenarios are “people working from home” and “people being cautious for a few months” is the norm for half toe country.

Shall I list the industries that cannot nor will ever work from home who cannot employ people?
 
Unless you have a sustainable plan to feed all the people you are suggesting be laid off as well as their children, I don’t think your plan is a very good one.

$2400 a couple based on tax returns from two years ago won’t even pay the average mortgage in many places. The cost of living in the US is hardly uniform.
 
Dr_Meinheimer said:
Shall I list the industries that cannot nor will ever work from home who cannot employ people?
Click to expand...
Lets list the industries that can afford loans at rock bottom interest rate prices to keep themselves afloat.

Those who cannot “work from home” that make their industrial product are the real sufferers here, lets first identify those hit the hardest.

This is first hand demonstration of the necessity, not privilege, but necessity of the laborer. This is also a first hand demonstration of just how far billion dollar tax cuts to these industries will impact the worker in a positive “trickle down” kind of way.

It doesn’t and it isn’t.
 
Industries don’t get loans, people do. The entire service industries, government contractors, and more can’t just “take a loan.” No bank is lending money to people to be nice; these people are all high-risk now, and with low interest rates, there isn’t even a lot of profit for the lender.

Where I work, there millions of people in the intel and military community for example who cannot work from home. Your plan is to have each one go through the consumer lending department and hope they qualify for loans? You honestly banks and lenders are equipped right now to float unsecured loans to millions of people? They have no collateral, if they already have a mortgage. And that’s just the employees. The business owners are a whole separate ball game. Our industry hasn’t been impacted as much as others yet, given the nature of the work, but I have to prepare for the possibility, and my employees know A) if they cannot get into a secure facility, they will not be paid and B) if this drags on to long, some will not have a job to come back to.

For anyone unaware, the math is untenable for small business. Take a company that has 15 employees. Let’s say the average salary is 100k (much higher in the mid-atlantic, but we will aim low). Since the government pays us on a net-45 delay, meaning once we send them our first invoice, we don’t get paid for about 45 days. Thus, as long as we are not out of work for more than 45 days, I and my fellow employers will likely be fine. But if we hit the 45 day mark, we essentially start the clock over on billing the government.

At that point, the owner would have to front 15 people x 3 paychecks (every two weeks) x $3850 per paycheck = $173,076 in cash before we even see a penny from the government. Since the average salary is 1.5 times that or more, the number is well about $300k. The employees know if that happens, I would likely have to take the least profitable ones and lay them off. Oh and during that 45+ day shutdown, they were getting paid if they were not billing any hours, so they are without income during the crisis, and then get laid off as soon as it ends.

Meanwhile, government workers will be paid for doing nothing from home no matter how long this goes in the exact same industries. Not say thing is the case with you, but I don’t think people have a grasp on the financials or the reality of a lot of industries (I can only speak to mine, the intel/defense community) and just think a little check from the government will keep people afloat.

What they should have done instead of arbitrarily sending checks based on 2 year old tax data (my wife and I don’t qualify based on 2018 income, but if I have zero income right now, shouldn’t I qualify)? What they should have done to be more effective in my opinion in freeze every collection of any kind; put a 6 month moratorium on EVERY bill in existence - mortgages, rents, utilities, credit cards, tuitions car loans, etc. That is a universal solution that adjusts relative to each person. If we are going to allow the government to have that much power in a crisis, why not go all out and use it effectively?
 
Dr_Meinheimer said:
Unless you have a sustainable plan to feed all the people you are suggesting be laid off as well as their children, I don’t think your plan is a very good one.

$2400 a couple based on tax returns from two years ago won’t even pay the average mortgage in many places. The cost of living in the US is hardly uniform.
Click to expand...
Actually, it seems that in many cities, including Chicago, there are sustainable plans to feed all the people.

It’s actually rather impressive how much money has been donated to provide meals for thousands of Chicago families, especially all the school children who are out of school.

The Chicago mayor spoke highly of Cardinal Cupich and the Catholic Charities–that’s gratifying because all too often, the media in Chicagl castigates anything Catholic.

She also spoke highly of the United Way, which is also doing heroic things in our Northern Illinois city.

And although I agree that in places like Chicago and NYC, $2400 is a drop in the bucket, in my city, it will pay mortgage or rent for at least three months, possibly longer. I think this is the case in most cities and towns in the U.S. In addition, there are many landlords who will show mercy and allow their tenants to skip a few months and pay later at whatever pace they can, reduce their rent cost for a few months, or they will simply dismiss the rent charges for the next few months (if they can afford to do this).

Pres. Trump seems willing to do as much as possible to give financial help to those who have lost their livelihood during this crisis. During the Press Conferences, all kinds of aid packages, financial helps, etc. have been cited.

And let’s not forget about “family.” My husband and I went for a long drive through Northern Illinois yesterday (in our junker car with no muffler and burning oil like straw!). The weather was beautiful and the scenery spectacular (oh, I know it doesn’t hold a candle to the Grand Canyon or the Acadian National Forests or the Smokies, but it’s beautiful to me–all that LAND, that beautiful land that gives us food!).

We saw many many houses in the small towns and farms with half a dozen or more cars parked in the driveway, and many people in the house or outside in the yard. Since gatherings of people are forbidden by the Governor in Illinois, it is logical to assume that all those people were family, come home from college, or perhaps moving in for a while because they lost their jobs and need food/shelter/warmth, or elderly who are frightened being alone. And it’s also possible that friends of the family were taken in because they have lost their livelihood and need some material assistance.

This is what we Americans do–gather as family, and experience tragedies and disasters together. I have already offered this to both of our daughters and their significant others, and they know that they can always come home.

So all is not lost .

I think much of the “hysteria” is media trying to top each other in their coverage of the pandemic. We have to take what we hear with a large grain of salt.
 
Last edited:
I don’t consider hoarding TP “hysteria.”

I consider it sensible.

My daughter has hoarded 82 rolls of TP. Originally it was 42 rolls, but she found a place to acquire more. I have no idea where she is storing them–her NYC apartment is smaller than most HGTV closets!

I think she plans on giving many of the rolls away to the people in her building. I hope that’s the case anyway. Maybe she just eats a a lot of high-fiber foods.
 
Getting through the pandemic is not so much a concern for most folks around here I don’t think. I could survive on saltines and water for months if I absolutely had to. It is the foreknowledge that once this is over, there will not be jobs there for a lot of these folks.

$2400 where I live in MD would pay for half the mortgage, for a lot of folks. So while I appreciate it, and would welcome it, it isn’t keeping people around here afloat. Plus, like I said they are using my income from two years ago, and have said I do not qualify. How does that make sense, if my income today is zero (it isn’t)? I am being penalized for having income before the pandemic, bit being hurt by the pandemic?

I totally get there is no perfect solution, but also get just like people generally don’t know what they are talking about when it comes to medical aspects, most people have no clue what they are talking about when it comes to the financial realities or impacts either.

Note none of this actually applies to me yet, so I am blessed and having just finished consecrating my family after 40 days to St. Joseph, we are very fortunate and in good hands. But I have looked at a myriad of scenarios to prepare for possibilities, and many of them have no good outcome for folks.

I think if they essentially froze all required bills and collections (essentially making every free for a period), it would ese people’s concerns. I know I wouldn’t even care about income if I didn’t actually need to spend it on anything.
 
That is her prerogative. I have five young children and stockpiled a lot myself. But I’d say unless she has a reasonable expectation of needing that many during the crisis, she has taken out of circulation what others need.

People were talking about whether or not gun sales were necessary and by the same logic as your daughter in NYC, it isn’t hoarding or excessive to buy guys whether you can use them all in a short burst or not.
 
Aaron Ginn said:

Evidence over hysteria​

Click to expand...
Concerning the title given to Aaron Ginn’s article, “hysteria” is one of those words for which use is sometimes discouraged. It is related to hysterectomy and hysteric. They are cognates of “hystera.” Hystera itself meaning “uterus.” Hysteric has been used to both label the condition of being a woman with a problem related to her womanhood and being wildly emotional. For a while it was even used as a psychological diagnosis. Understandably based on it’s previous usage the word is viewed as being a bit sexists. Whether or not one thinks that this word should be used or retired is an individual decision. But I thought it important to point to the etymology and usage of the word so that what ever one decides will at least be an informed decision.

On the sexist etimology of “hysteria,” and what academia did about it

Hysteria comes from the Greek root hystera, meaning ‘uterus.’ Originally, it was believed that hysteria and hysterical symptoms were caused…
medium.com medium.com
 
If more people would evangelize using the core of the Gospel, rather than evangelize their political ideology, this would be a better website, and world!
 
Dr_Meinheimer said:
Getting through the pandemic is not so much a concern for most folks around here I don’t think. I could survive on saltines and water for months if I absolutely had to. It is the foreknowledge that once this is over, there will not be jobs there for a lot of these folks.
Click to expand...
I think there WILL be jobs.

Some restaurants and shops will shut down permanently. But others will re-open and do a booming business because many of us are used to going out to eat several times a week and shopping for recreation (vintage stores–not much fun to shop online for this, although my husband does for his collectibles), and sitting at home or doing take-out is not what we prefer!

The fun of going out to eat or shop is the “GOING OUT” part! 🙂 And we are all looking forward to having the safe freedom to do this again, especially as spring and summer are right around the corner (we hope).

These restaurants will need wait staff, cooks, maintenance people, etc. The shops will need their stockers, cashiers, and floor staff.

People who choose to do these jobs will have plenty of jobs.

They just have to make it through the next few weeks (or heaven forbid, months). And that’s what all the relief monies and services will help them do. I don’t think anyone will starve or freeze because no one will help them.

In addition, there are all the recreational facilities, parks, resorts, etc. that are shuttered for now, but will re-open again, and families will rush to get to these places. People who have gained weight stress-eating during the sheltering-in-place will be joining gyms and sighing up for fitness/health classes.

I think the people who have to worry a little are business people who are working from home right now. Will their companies discover that having many of their people working from home is a huge money saver? Home workers use their own desk, drink their own water, use their own toilet, their own computer, their own phone, their own copy/fax machine, their own business supplies, their own heat and air-conditioning, and their own cleaning staff! They take less time for lunch because they can make a quick PBandJ sandwich!

My husband thinks it’s possible that many companies will tell their workers, “Just continue to work from home. We’ve decided it’s more cost-effective.”

Working from home has pros and cons. The biggest “con” is loneliness, or “aloneness.” it’s kind of fun to have conversations around the water cooler! The other big con is relatives and friends who think that just because you’re at home, you’re available to do little chores, sit and chat, etc.
 
Last edited:
Peeps said:
Some restaurants and shops will shut down permanently. But others will re-open and do a booming business because many of us are used to going out to eat several times a week and shopping for recreation
Click to expand...
Isn’t being able to do that subordinate to having a job/income? What one is used to might not matter much without the economic means to do it. My expectation is that there are many things that we were used to that will now be different on the long term.

(edit, appending)
I think for some this will be a painful lesson in the importance of having a larger savings and putting some of their expendable cash away since they never know when something could happen that may leave them unemployeed. At the other end of this there will be people that need a job, but will struggle to get one because there are less jobs available and more people competing for available positions. At the same time there will still be needs that require money such as food, water, electricity, so on.

I’m not even sure what it means for this to be over; will this virus completely die off, or will we have spikes and lulls in infections of it. Will people have immunity, or will this virus mutate into new strains so that complete immunity is not possible. Will there be other new viruses that come after this?

Will shaking hands become a thing of the past just to be on the safe side, or will people go back to doing it?

As a software engineer I’ve worked on several projects for stores and museums that involve touch screens. I’m now looking into alternative natural means of interaction since touching a screen contributes to spreading infectious agents and I can’t help but consider that a touch screen interface could contribute to a number of the users experiencing sickness, life altering injury, or death; it just doesn’t seam as friendly of an interface any more.
 
Last edited:
I think you paint far too rosy a picture of the financial impact. There are lots and lots of business who will not come back. Unemployment numbers will likely spike in ways not seen in a long time.

Wages will go down, because again, we have now have a candidate pool flushed with eager people. As an employer, if I weather the storm, I will have a feeding frenzy of people looking for work, which drives wages wayyyyy down. Their only leverage is to accept a lower rate.

This also doesn’t speak to the inevitable inflation spike that is coming and the question of who is going to pay for these temporary measures. As usual, in the long-term this is going to hit the “middle class” when the bill comes due.

Again, I find it odd we are told to take the medical aspects of this deathly seriously, but don’t do the same for the financial impacts which will be with us long after any quarantine is over. We are concerned about the elderly, and should be, but there are elderly who just saw 25% of their “nest egg” wiped out. I have guys working for me who were two years from retirement who have told me they will likely have to work another 5-7 now, which puts them in their early seventies. Great for me; terrible for them.

Anyone who can telework lives in a bubble I am afraid. The largest class of employers in the country is small business owners. The VAST majority cannot support telework by the nature of their work. Here are just some examples of professions that can’t telework.
  • waiters/waitresses
  • landscapers
  • plumbers
  • electricians
  • medical professionals
  • people who jobs require a government clearance at “Secret” or above
  • Coaches
  • child care providers
  • cleaning services
  • auto parts manufacturers
  • nurseries (plant-based)
  • military (by and large)
  • clothiers
  • grocers
  • pretty much any retail sales
The list kind of just keeps going. And oh by the way, if we moved primarily telework driven workforce, would that increase wages or drive them down? One would think that by not having to provide space for employees to have a desk, the company would save money but it depends on how much that company already passes off to their employees. I suspect most employers would offer less to the person who gets to work from home than the person who has to leave his house and go to an office, and why wouldn’t he? It is a perk most folks would want.

I agree we will get through this and society will continue but that is true medically too. No matter how many millions die, life will go on for everyone else, right?

That doesn’t mean the impacts are life-altering though.
 
Totally agree about the changes to how we live and work. And you are correct - one lesson everyone learned is the need for savings. Businesses need 6 months of payroll in reserve, and individuals need the same for their personal budget. If both aim for that goal, and one falls short, the other short be able to account for that.

Thinking telecommuting is a solution to society’s woes is very naïve, IMO, but in fairness, we are all biased by the small enterprise we operate in. NOT being able to telecommute is foreign to my sister who works in alumni development at a major university. BEING able to telecommute is foreign to all the folks I work with in the intel community.
 
Also, what impact does telework have on the real estate market (primarily commercial)? I don’t need brick and mortar office space if I assign all my employees to use their homes. The cost of commercially leased space is enormous, and if that cost can be jettisoned, it will.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top