WALSH: Rioters Violate Social Distancing. Media Doesn’t Care. But Here’s What They Said About Conservative Protesters

[LeafByNiggle]

continuing:…

You called this coronavirus a “novel” coronavirus. Fair enough. By that logic, those flu strains that hit hard before flu vaccination was common were technically “novel”

I don’t think that is what they mean in the medical community when they talk about novel. My understanding is that SARS/Cov2 is not a strain of the flu, or even closely related to any other human virus. It is called a corona virus only because of it’s visible shape. That does not imply any genetic similarity to other corona virus, notably the common cold.

About 1918, I looked up Philadelphia and St Louis. St Louis banned large gatherings so their death toll was much smaller than Philadelphia. Many schools and other entities engaged in voluntary quarantines across the country. But nowhere did I see St Louis banning the healthy from attempting to make a living otherwise.

There may have been businesses that depended on the events that they cancelled in St. Louis, so in that sense perhaps they did prevent the healthy from making a living.

My take isn’t complete totally open, no precautions necessary.

Nor is my take that businesses be closed regardless of what accommodations they can make to the virus. I think rules should be refined and made conditional, not absolute. And in time I think they will be.

My take is sure, ban the large gatherings, but also issue guidelines for caring for the sick and vulnerable at home. These are readily available; we already have guidelines for cancer victims at home when treatments have ravaged their immune systems and these can be adapted for the coronavirus. Now I never said stop there, do not put that in my mouth. I don’t think highly of masks, but I am big on washing hands everywhere and not touching one’s face in public. All test results should be available within hours, not days.

I think we are on the same page on all those points.

Allow full access to beaches and parks.

I think that depends. Most beaches and parks, yes. They should be open. Most such places are sparsely used and present very little risk for virus spread. But the “spring break” type madness of crowds dancing shoulder to shoulder, even on the beach, should be banned. I don’t know how to ensure sparse use, but somehow it should be the rule.

But above all, do not ban healthy people from attempting to make a living.

OK, but how about establishing rules that allow them to stay in business, even if compliance to those rules make business somewhat difficult and less profitable? There are a lot of businesses that were already on the edge before covid. I can see how additional covid regulations might push them over the edge, but I don’t see any other choice, except perhaps government subsidies to help them transition to a different business model, or stay afloat until after covid. That we have done before in agriculture.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

OK, but how about establishing rules that allow them to stay in business, even if compliance to those rules make business somewhat difficult and less profitable? There are a lot of businesses that were already on the edge before covid. I can see how additional covid regulations might push them over the edge, but I don’t see any other choice, except perhaps government subsidies to help them transition to a different business model, or stay afloat until after covid. That we have done before in agriculture.

In 1918, the impact of the pandemic varied widely by region around the country. PA as you might guess had the highest mortality rate in the entire country. Followed by MD and NJ. Not surprising. But there were parts of the country that were not hit nearly as hard. So the economic impact varied widely across the country. The hard hit areas took quite the drop in their local economy while not so hard hit areas did better. While economic data about the era is sparse, educated guesses as to the nationwide drop in GDP tend to center around 10% to 12% with a fairly fast recovery before the 1921 Depression.

Compare that to this year’s annualized 32.9% drop in GDP which far surpassed any other era in our history, not to mention the record high unemployment rate. In 1918, the government didn’t interfere with commerce nearly as much as they do today so the private sector recovered much faster. Biggest problem commerce had in 1918-19 was the number of people who could show up to work, owing to that the hardest hit demographic back then was able bodied men aged 18 to 40 years old. Unlike today when the hardest hit demographic is over 65. Plenty of young people are available to work today and they want (or need) to work. Let them.

Somewhere out on the internet, there is a thoughtful paper written by the Federal Reserve back in the 00’s about the impact of the 1918 pandemic. Will have to dig that up.

What I remember about that is that in 1918, the hard hit areas didn’t translate their severe economic downtrends nationwide. The governments did that for us this year, that alone is a vast difference between these two pandemics. This year, the governments took something that was mostly fatal among the old and translated its impact across all sectors, that is what I am strenuously objecting to. When a real pandemic hits, I fear it will be far worse than this year thanks to the precedent set by the degree of government interference this year. Think how hard SD got slammed politically for not buying into the lockdowns that the other states did. That’s government for you.

So again, we did this to ourselves with a pandemic that is not that much worse than the bad flu years of 1968 and 1957. I fear what the heavy handed governments will do if we get hit like we did in 1918. The economic recovery in 1919 and 1920 would not be allowed to happen this time around because the governments would absolutely positively insist on maintaining the heavy hand as they are doing now.

Let the healthy work, don’t handcuff them!