You say that "Everything is still being done in such an individualistic way that the very concept of ‘society’ doesn’t seem to be grasped." Let's re-cast that. Washington has flat out failed. Very well, that sucks, but that is not our last resort. In fact, we had already been in the habit, most Americans of any governmental/supervisory responsibility at all, of NOT looking to Washington for sage advice. Three years of chaos teaches you to consider your other options.
That's why it looks individualistic to you--we have 50-some governors all pulling their other options out of their back pockets and attempting to lean on local, inter-state, and inter-national relationships that do NOT go through Washington, because duh. Yes, it looks freaking uncoordinated, but that doesn't mean it's ineffective or useless. It's just multiple. Governors and health departments and mayors and (fill in the blank) are busy learning from one another and filching each others' ideas, as well as bypassing Trump and hitting up national resources like the CDC on their own.
So yeah, we're in a bad spot. But America is not about to dissolve. We are a strongly patriotic country, in spite of recent, ah, misfortunes, and like most human beings, we will find a way of rising to the challenge. It just won't look coordinated. But looks are not important at this point.
There are some disadvantages to an uncoordinated, state-level response. The first and most obvious is that states can't engage in deficit spending the same way the federal government can. This makes state budgets pro-cyclical, i.e. they're flush with funds when the economy is good and looking for loose change in the metaphorical couch during recessions. Needless to say when large sectors of the economy shut down (travel, hospitality, storefront retail) states have less money to confront any given crisis. Most states have "rainy day" funds set aside for downturns, but I don't have any idea whether those are funded well enough for the current situation.
The second problem with federal inaction is one of resource coordination. Governors are competing with each other (and with the private sector) for a limited pool of scant resources (masks, gloves, ventilators, . . . everything). It's not clear that the kind of bidding war that arises in such situations will lead to an optimal distribution of resources. In fact, it almost certainly won't. This is why competent federal coordination is key in such situations of shortage, not just for allocation of existing resources but because the federal government has a fairly wide array of powers to command the production of things, something beyond the powers of most state governments.
So on one level the multi-level U.S. system of government provides some back-up when one part of it fails spectacularly, but governors and state legislatures are not a perfect fix for federal failures.
So on one level the multi-level U.S. system of government provides some back-up when one part of it fails spectacularly, but governors and state legislatures are not a perfect fix for federal failures.
Of course not. But Boogie said she was afraid civil society in the US would collapse, which is quite frankly a ridiculous notion. The failures at the federal level mean more of us will die and the economic suffering will be deeper and longer-lasting. But the country will not completely fall apart.
Frau Merkel's compassionate action in allowing so many refugees into Germany a few years ago (you know, those Horrid Foreign People Not Like Us, so unbeloved of our 'government') is reaping its reward.
I can't locate the link just now, but it seems that many of those refugees, taken in by Germany, are healthcare professionals of various kinds, and are now ready and willing to pitch in to help the country that helped them.
Five years ago the arrival of a wave of refugees caused much consternation and fueled support for Germany’s far-right. Now, the country is turning to its migrant community to plug an anticipated shortage of medical staff battling the coronavirus.
The German government says it can double its number of intensive care beds, and even produce more ventilators but a medical staffing crunch is shaping up as the Achilles heel of its strategy to fight the coronavirus.
In Saxony, the heartland of the nationalist Alternative for Germany (AfD), the regional medical board is advertising for migrant doctors to help tackle an expected rise in cases.
"Foreign doctors who are in Saxony but do not yet have a license to practice medicine can help with corona(virus) care," read a Facebook appeal. here
Apparently people who are resourceful enough to escape a war zone are talented and motivated. Who knew?
Of course not. But Boogie said she was afraid civil society in the US would collapse, which is quite frankly a ridiculous notion. The failures at the federal level mean more of us will die and the economic suffering will be deeper and longer-lasting. But the country will not completely fall apart.
I am still afraid for the US.
People dying in enormous numbers and economic collapse will lead to fear. Millions of people with guns + fear isn’t a good equation.
A note about statistics. Germany's death rate is much lower than many countries, especially those with high infection rates. The why of this is not necessarily as optimistic as it sounds. Germany's rate is lower, in part, due to more testing. So they have identified more cases, which inflates their overall infection rate compared to other countries, but it also deflates their death rate.
In the end, the most accurate number we will have is how many died.
Although, the time between first identified case and the highest spike, as well as the steepness of the decline afterwards will tell something of the effectiveness of the policies of each country.
Hungary’s parliament handed Prime Minister Viktor Orban the right to rule by decree indefinitely, effectively putting the European Union democracy [ ed - rule by decree is not compatible with democracy ] under his sole command for as long as he sees fit.
While governments around the world assume emergency powers to fight the coronavirus, locking down all aspects of every-day life and shutting borders, few democracies have given their governments such latitude without an end date.
Hungary’s ruling party lawmakers overrode the objections of the opposition in a vote on Monday, handing Orban the right to bypass the assembly on any law. The Constitutional Court, which Orban has stacked with loyalists, will be the main body capable of reviewing government actions.
The emergency-rule law “poses no threat to democracy,” Orban told lawmakers after the vote. His detractors didn’t agree.
Can't think why.
[ Justice Minister Judit ] Varga asked journalists not to “distort” facts, a crime the legislation makes punishable by as long as five years in jail for anyone deemed hampering the virus fight.
I'm sure someone with Mr. Orbán's record on freedom of the press would never abuse the power to imprison journalists without trial or recourse.
Brazil. For a start. I'd rather be in Venezuela over the coming months... years than Brazil, Russia, India... because they're socialists. Because they, for all their faults, will aim for equality of outcome. Even though their unwisdom in that from the start is part of the problem; leveraging a future workers' paradise based on high oil prices that collapsed.
Of course not. But Boogie said she was afraid civil society in the US would collapse, which is quite frankly a ridiculous notion. The failures at the federal level mean more of us will die and the economic suffering will be deeper and longer-lasting. But the country will not completely fall apart.
I am still afraid for the US.
People dying in enormous numbers and economic collapse will lead to fear. Millions of people with guns + fear isn’t a good equation.
I very dearly want to be wrong.
Oh for crying out loud.
About 675,000 people in the US died in the Spanish flu pandemic, out of a population of about 103 million - about .655% of the whole. If 200,000 out of the current population of over 330 million die of Covid-19, it won't come close to being as bad as the Spanish flu - about .06% of the whole. The US didn't come apart at the seams in 1918-19; what do you think is different now?
Of course not. But Boogie said she was afraid civil society in the US would collapse, which is quite frankly a ridiculous notion. The failures at the federal level mean more of us will die and the economic suffering will be deeper and longer-lasting. But the country will not completely fall apart.
I am still afraid for the US.
People dying in enormous numbers and economic collapse will lead to fear. Millions of people with guns + fear isn’t a good equation.
I very dearly want to be wrong.
Boogie, there are ALWAYS idiots. Yet most people (yea, verily, even gun owners!) are smart enough to know that you can't shoot a virus (shaddup, all you microscope geeks!) and there's no point in shooting anything else.
I have no doubt that there will be one or two spectacular cases of a completely brainless dweeb doing something unthinkable with a gun which will then be reported worldwide as "the American response to coronavirus." Because of course there will.
But you seem to be envisioning rioting in the streets (not gonna happen--can't do that with a six foot distance ), people defending their hoards of toilet paper with AK-47s (just ) and zombies marching down the street, shooting everybody they see.
It really, really isn't like that. And I live in St. Louis, the so-called "murder capital of the U.S."
The vast majority of gun violence is gang-and-drug related and confined to certain neighborhoods (God help them). The next largest category as far as I can tell is domestic violence (God help them too, shut up at home together). This is still a tiny, tiny percentage of Americans.
There's really only one person I can think of who really, really, REALLY needs to be worried about being a victim of gun violence on account of the coronavirus, and he has Secret Security agents for that.
Hungary’s parliament handed Prime Minister Viktor Orban the right to rule by decree indefinitely, effectively putting the European Union democracy [ ed - rule by decree is not compatible with democracy ] under his sole command for as long as he sees fit.
While governments around the world assume emergency powers to fight the coronavirus, locking down all aspects of every-day life and shutting borders, few democracies have given their governments such latitude without an end date.
Hungary’s ruling party lawmakers overrode the objections of the opposition in a vote on Monday, handing Orban the right to bypass the assembly on any law. The Constitutional Court, which Orban has stacked with loyalists, will be the main body capable of reviewing government actions.
The emergency-rule law “poses no threat to democracy,” Orban told lawmakers after the vote. His detractors didn’t agree.
Can't think why.
[ Justice Minister Judit ] Varga asked journalists not to “distort” facts, a crime the legislation makes punishable by as long as five years in jail for anyone deemed hampering the virus fight.
I'm sure someone with Mr. Orbán's record on freedom of the press would never abuse the power to imprison journalists without trial or recourse.
What makes you think Hungary was ever a democracy? Just because we called various countries democracies after the Soviet Union dissolved itself, doesn't mean that's what they are or were. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/25/world/europe/hungary-democracy-orban.html Any more than pre-Islamic revolution Iran was democratic. The pretense of democracy and trappings of it, don't make for a democratic country. And we like other countries to not be democratic, because it generally makes business easier if it is authoritarian, organized along totalitarian or mafia lines.
I am sure the US won't collapse or come apart at the seams. It has the money and infrastructure to weather this storm - and plenty of good people too.
Sure, the rest of the world would carp if some nutjob goes on a shooting spree - 'The American response to Coronavirus' - but that's the price you pay for the Second Amendment - or, rather, for failing to apply the Second Amendment in a responsible way.
'It's the price we pay for freedom,' as an American gun advocate once crowed self-righteously at me from across the Atlantic on social media before I learned how futile it was even to discuss the subject.
There are plenty of other countries with similar - or worse - issues with guns. The US isn't unique in that respect. Let's keep things in perspective.
It's all relative. All countries have their particular weak spots and issues.
The US has the resources and infrastructure to cope. Some countries don't and that's the real worry. If it starts spreading in poorer parts of South East Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.
The Spanish Flu epidemic was particularly virulent among populations that hadn't been exposed to any flu virus before - or only to a limited extent. The Inuit and Pacific islanders were particularly hard hit.
What makes you think Hungary was ever a democracy?
The free elections that took place from 1990-2010, during which power often changed hands between rival parties. The 2010 election brought Orbán and Fidesz to power and they've spent the last decade dismantling Hungarian democracy so this recent switch to rule by decree is more like the obvious end point of a long slide than a sudden seizure of power, but that doesn't mean Hungarian democracy never existed.
and zombies marching down the street, shooting everybody they see.
Wife and I found ourselves caught up in a "zombie battle" once. Seems like the college kids liked to use the underground parking lots on campus for their little battles. Often times they would use lasers to tag each other. We just found ourselves in one of those garages one night.
Getting back to the breakdown of American society: not going to happen. Often times, when faced with calamity, the divisions disappear and everyone pulls together.
Getting back to the breakdown of American society: not going to happen. Often times, when faced with calamity, the divisions disappear and everyone pulls together.
By my estimation American society/governance has collapsed three times in its history and the "America" that emerged from the process was so radically different than the America that had existed before that it was essentially a new country.
1786-1789: Widespread financial crunch and unrest in the wake of the American Revolution leads to collapse of the Articles of Confederation and the adoption of America's current federal system and Constitution.
1861-1872: Disputes over free labor vs. slavery lead to the misnamed American Civil War followed by "a new birth of freedom" achieved through the Civil War Amendments and the (sadly incomplete) Reconstruction and re-ordering of a large chunk of the country.
1933-1945: The Great Depression and Second World War led to a thorough restructuring of American government, putting more power in the hands of the federal government at the expense of the states and the president at the expense of Congress. The social transformation of these years was also particularly stark, both domestically and in terms of foreign relations.
This seems to happen every 70-80 years or so. Seems like the U.S. is just about due for another.
dude, who pissed in your cheerios? Transformation is not utter destruction, falling apart, or droves of gunsmen in the street. I think we can all expect pretty huge changes in whatever place we inhabit, but that doesn't mean that we're going to fucking fall apart altogether.
You might consider, too, that this is getting mighty close to a pond war. Boogie's expressions of care and concern are kindly meant; that's not a problem.
By my estimation American society/governance has collapsed three times in its history and the "America" that emerged from the process was so radically different than the America that had existed before that it was essentially a new country.
I have a gut feel about the UK that we will return to a 'new normal'. It remains to be seen what that will look like. We seriously underestimated the risk and the consequences, otherwise we would have been better prepared.
Disaster planning is a normal feature of the work of public authorities here, but it clearly didn't cover this situation all that well. We need to do better on that front. So does the USA. On that I should think we can reach across the pond and agree.
I share some of the same concerns as you (and Croesos and others). I don't know what will happen, and I sure don't want bad stuff to happen--but reality generally run focus groups ahead of time to get people's opinions.
However, I can't really live in that mindspace--too stressful and painful. So I try to keep it to occasional thoughts.
LC--
Was your Cheerios comment directed at Croesos? If so, he's an American, AFAIK, so there can't be a pond war between you.
It's the smaller companies that don't have Amazon's riches to tide them over that will go under.
It's my understanding that Amazon's business model involves running tight margins to undercut competitors and thus it is actually more vulnerable than it looks.
That said, right now being in delivery is much less vulnerable than traditional retail.
Do you still have a New Years honours list in Australia? I reckon that the Australian astrophysicist mentioned above deserves some kind of Honour for making people laugh at such a difficult time.
I share some of the same concerns as you (and Croesos and others). I don't know what will happen, and I sure don't want bad stuff to happen--but reality generally run focus groups ahead of time to get people's opinions.
However, I can't really live in that mindspace--too stressful and painful. So I try to keep it to occasional thoughts.
There should be a "doesn't" right after "reality". Sorry.
It's the smaller companies that don't have Amazon's riches to tide them over that will go under.
It's my understanding that Amazon's business model involves running tight margins to undercut competitors and thus it is actually more vulnerable than it looks.
That said, right now being in delivery is much less vulnerable than traditional retail.
AIUI: Amazon warehouse workers go on strike tomorrow, over virus safety issues and other things. Delivery service Insta-Cart went on strike today, for similar reasons.
If the management of each company has any sense at all, they'll give in quickly. If the workers at both companies have any sense at all, they'll realize they can leverage the urgent need people staying at home have for purchase and delivery of essentials. If the management doesn't give in, they'll miss all those extra profits.
If they do give in, they can do a PR spin of being kind to their workers (who, they've just remembered, are people, after all); caring about the lives of the workers and customers; and generally being good guys, gosh darn it.
No, and I apologize for my misunderstanding. But I am still frustrated by anyone who seems willfully to sow despair in a time like this. All the more so as I had to bail somebody out of what seemed to me a rather dangerous depression only an hour or so ago.
List of countries with at least 5,000 known COVID-19 cases.
United States - 164,253 (135,135 / 5,507 / 3,167)
Italy - 101,739 (73,880 / 14,620 / 11,591)
Spain - 87,956 (2,466 / 16,780 / 7,716)
China - 81,518 (58,598 / 76,052 / 3,305) 4.2%
Germany - 66,885 (52,683 / 13,500 / 645)
France - 44,550 (30,366 / 7,927 / 3,024)
Iran - 41,495 (23,278 / 13,911 / 2,757)
United Kingdom - 22,141 (18,159 / 135 / 1,408)
Switzerland - 15,922 (12,934 / 1,823 / 359)
Belgium - 11,899 (9,845 / 1,527 / 513)
Netherlands - 11,750 (9,046 / 250 / 864)
Turkey - 10,827 (4,275 / 162 / 168)
South Korea - 9,786 (8,981 / 5,408 / 162)
Austria - 9,618 (8,223 / 636 / 108)
Canada - 7,474 (5,682 / 1,114 / 92)
Portugal - 6,408 (5,800 / 43 / 140)
The listings are in the format:
X. Country - [# of known cases] ([active] / [recovered] / [dead]) [%fatality rate]
Fatality rates are only listed for countries where the number of resolved cases (recovered + dead) exceeds the number of known active cases by a ratio of at least 2:1. Italics indicate authoritarian countries whose official statistics are suspect. Other country's statistics are suspect if their testing regimes are substandard.
Notably, the number of deaths in the United States has now surpassed the number killed in the 9/11 attacks.
Since the last compilation no nations have joined this particular club.
An interesting first hand account of our last pandemic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7k20VFZeLKY A hundred year old lady whose family survived the Spanish flu and served their small community.
No, and I apologize for my misunderstanding. But I am still frustrated by anyone who seems willfully to sow despair in a time like this. All the more so as I had to bail somebody out of what seemed to me a rather dangerous depression only an hour or so ago.
I don't know about despair, but I remain in the club of those who think life will be radically different after all this. Paris' second airport, Orly, usually 90,000 passengers per day, has just closed to all regular traffic ('last and final call before the gates close') for an unspecified period. Traffic has moved to Charles de Gaulle which as a result expects to see 10,000 passengers per day compared to a usual 200,000. I can't see Orly reopening any time soon. Just thinking about the infrastructure and immediate and knock-on economic implications of that one facility closing makes my head spin, before multiplying it out to every other closed factory and facility across the country.
I am not despairing. But I am concerned and I care a great deal. I have many RL friends in the US and Mr Boogs has many, many more. As well as caring about US Shipmates, of course.
I don’t think being concerned and realistic is despairing.
But maybe I need to shut up now as I’m clearly not doing any good either. I will stick to the All Saints thread about the virus instead of posting here.
Disaster planning is a normal feature of the work of public authorities here, but it clearly didn't cover this situation all that well. We need to do better on that front. So does the USA. On that I should think we can reach across the pond and agree.
I think also, we shouldn’t underestimate the amount that *has* worked. Previous planning has left us with lots or processes and systems that have kicked in effectively. And those processes and systems are part of the toolset being used to overcome the areas where we are lacking.
Disaster planning is a normal feature of the work of public authorities here, but it clearly didn't cover this situation all that well. We need to do better on that front. So does the USA. On that I should think we can reach across the pond and agree.
From what I've seen reported (and, my own experience of involvement, more than a decade ago, of disaster planning in a different field) I'm not so sure that the fault lies at the foot of those directly involved in disaster planning. Disaster planning involves regular "desk top" exercises, occasionally involving large scale exercising of the boots on the ground (these tend to be very occasional on a large scale because you utilise resources that have an everyday use - imagine a national scale exercise which involves half of the UKs paramedics play-acting an emergency for a couple of days). Usually every exercise highlights potential problems and solutions - that may be gaps in available equipment and expert staff, it may be that that equipment and staff is there but needs a bit of additional training, it may be that there will need to be particular instructions given to the public and it's unclear how those will be received and followed which requires both research in public communication and possibly some preparation by educating the public.
From what I've seen, over the last few years such desk-top exercises of 'flu pandemics have highlighted the fact that the NHS doesn't have sufficient ICU capacity and ventilator availability (which includes both physical infrastructure and numbers of trained staff), that coping with a 'flu pandemic would need to involve rapid emplacement of social distancing to slow the build-up of the number of critical cases to spread them out and that there would need to be an investment in the long term build-up of the NHS capacity so that in the event of a pandemic there would be better provision of critical resources. The disaster management preparation system did what it was supposed to; the failings were that the government ignored the advice of the experts - both before the current outbreak by refusing to invest in the NHS and public education (how many here had heard of "social distancing" before the start of this year? How many knew that a pandemic response would involve restrictions on movement? If you had heard of these, how well did the public understand why these are needed? Judging by the number of people flouting the instructions to stay in and avoid close contact with others, or panic buying in supermarkets, these messages had not sunk into the bulk of the public before the emergency), and once the outbreak occurred by being slow to introduce social distancing.
Other countries have had their own versions of failing to learn from their disaster management preparations. In the US a well publicised example would be failure to maintain funding for specialist response teams in the federal CDC.
We've learnt our lessons, and in the next few years we're going to see a maintenance of pandemic control infrastructure ... which will slowly decline. As I said, I've been involved in preparations for radiological or nuclear disaster over the years. We have a timeline of such disasters and responses: the disaster happens, everyone dashes around doing whatever they can to respond without proper training and equipment; we learn how we should have responded and we move from a reactive "oh, my God we must do something!" to a pro-active "let's think through what we can do and work out the best approach" phase; the response moves from dealing with immediate consequences to recovery and returning to normality; we spend a few years learning from the emergency, writing reports on what worked and what didn't, doing research to develop better ways to respond etc; time passes and we forget what was learnt, those who coordinated the emergency retire, government changes and asks whether they need to spend so much money on this ... everything learnt is forgotten and the infrastructure put in during those first few post-emergency years degrades. Then a disaster happens ... and we're back to the beginning.
Usually every exercise highlights potential problems and solutions - that may be gaps in available equipment and expert staff, it may be that that equipment and staff is there but needs a bit of additional training, it may be that there will need to be particular instructions given to the public and it's unclear how those will be received and followed which requires both research in public communication and possibly some preparation by educating the public.
From what I've seen, over the last few years such desk-top exercises of 'flu pandemics have highlighted the fact that the NHS doesn't have sufficient ICU capacity and ventilator availability (which includes both physical infrastructure and numbers of trained staff), that coping with a 'flu pandemic would need to involve rapid emplacement of social distancing to slow the build-up of the number of critical cases to spread them out and that there would need to be an investment in the long term build-up of the NHS capacity so that in the event of a pandemic there would be better provision of critical resources. The disaster management preparation system did what it was supposed to; the failings were that the government ignored the advice of the experts - both before the current outbreak by refusing to invest in the NHS and public education (how many here had heard of "social distancing" before the start of this year? How many knew that a pandemic response would involve restrictions on movement? If you had heard of these, how well did the public understand why these are needed? Judging by the number of people flouting the instructions to stay in and avoid close contact with others, or panic buying in supermarkets, these messages had not sunk into the bulk of the public before the emergency), and once the outbreak occurred by being slow to introduce social distancing. <snip>
Story in the Sunday Telegraph, behind a paywall, although they are offering a month free, so I can only get to the introduction:
The NHS failed a major cross-government test of its ability to handle a severe pandemic but the “terrifying” results were kept secret from the public, the Sunday Telegraph can reveal.
Ministers were informed three years ago that Britain would be quickly overwhelmed by a severe outbreak amid a shortage of critical care beds, morgue capacity and personal protective equipment (PPE), an investigation has discovered.
Codenamed Exercise Cygnus, the three-day dry run for a pandemic carried out in October 2016 tested how NHS hospitals and other services would cope in the event of a major flu outbreak with a similar mortality rate to Covid-19.
I found it interesting that this is a report from the Torygraph.
An interesting first hand account of our last pandemic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7k20VFZeLKY A hundred year old lady whose family survived the Spanish flu and served their small community.
Thankyou, @Lyda. I found that intensely moving, especially as it was recorded back in 2008.
The NHS failed a major cross-government test of its ability to handle a severe pandemic but the “terrifying” results were kept secret from the public, the Sunday Telegraph can reveal.
I found it interesting that this is a report from the Torygraph.
The story seems to be framing it as the NHS failed but we weren't told. The Guardian would I think frame it as the NHS needed more resources but the Government didn't do anything about it.
Some disaster planning is transferable. An important part of the French approach to the pandemic involves freeing up ICU beds by evacuating people from the worst affected regions (which in the event, means Alsace and increasingly the Ile de France) to other less stressed hospitals elsewhere. Some of the patients are being evacuated by army helicopter, others on specially adapted trains. This includes the patients who have been evacuated to Germany and Switzerland, because yay European cooperation. They choose people who are critically ill, but stable enough to be moved.
I learned last night that this contingency was initially designed as part of the disaster planning for dealing with a terrorist attack, rather than a pandemic. They quickly realised that it would be a useful strategy in the current situation.
Arizona is under shelter-at-home orders beginning 5:00pm today. My brother-in-law predicts that grocery shopping, already . . . erm . . . interesting, will get even more so in the coming days.
After a bad patch, shopping has improved a lot here in London. Whereas last week, we stared aghast at empty shelves, and went from shop to shop, the local supermarket is now jammed with everything. I don't know if they have increased deliveries, but they are now rationing, so you can't buy 500 pot noodles. Some nurdle suggested banning Easter eggs, what a total prat.
After a bad patch, shopping has improved a lot here in London. Whereas last week, we stared aghast at empty shelves, and went from shop to shop, the local supermarket is now jammed with everything. I don't know if they have increased deliveries
I assume what happened is that the buying was down to people having to stock up, plus shifting purchases from outlets to having to provide more of their meals themselves, and the supply chains are slowly adjusting. The figures being bandied around were about 2bn extra spend over one month -- which sounds like a lot, but compares to 3.7bn spent per week at the supermarkets.
I assume also that selection and the supply of some fresh food will be disrupted in the medium term, but at the moment anyway people will remain able to get basics and feed themselves.
I'm not scheduled to go out shopping until Thursday, but yesterday's visit to my local corner shop enabled me to get everything I had on my list. Thursday's trip will be to Tesco, where hopefully I shall find reasonable stocks, and not too long a queue to get in.
Toilet paper, and tomato soup, still seem to be the new gold, though...
I was chewing over some of the right wing opposition to the lock down, as I like to know what they are saying. There's a mixture of "save the economy", and critiques of the epidemiology, and also warnings about the new tyranny. Usually, a scientist is found who decries the severe measures, and asks for proof that they will save lives.
I would have thought that China and Korea offer evidence that a lockdown suppresses the virus. But as usual, it seems that all the critiques omit the nature of exponential growth. If you let it rip, it will rip big time.
A UK example of this opposition is Peter Hitchens, and an article still on the Daily Mail website, "this great Panic is foolish".
I would have thought that China and Korea offer evidence that a lockdown suppresses the virus. But as usual, it seems that all the critiques omit the nature of exponential growth. If you let it rip, it will rip big time.
The problem is that absent any other measures, this is still likely to be true when the lockdown ends, and you have wrecked the economy in the meantime.
(Disclaimer: I'm in favour of lockdown. But in my view the arguments are not as straightforward as anti-right wing critics would have you believe).
I would have thought that China and Korea offer evidence that a lockdown suppresses the virus. But as usual, it seems that all the critiques omit the nature of exponential growth. If you let it rip, it will rip big time.
The problem is that absent any other measures, this is still likely to be true when the lockdown ends, and you have wrecked the economy in the meantime.
(Disclaimer: I'm in favour of lockdown. But in my view the arguments are not as straightforward as anti-right wing critics would have you believe).
Well, if the advice from scientists was an endless series of lockdowns, or waves of the virus, we would be im Stuck. However, I think there is some light at the end of the tunnel, e.g., vaccine, the virus burning out, anti-viral meds. I'm not sure what the right wingers are advocating; do nothing has a horrible mathematical consequence.
I think the time frame is longer than we think it will be. I'm hearing 18 months minimum re vaccine and this doesn't mean availability at that point, it means one which will work. Not mass production of it.
As for resets of societies, this one is probably part of the generational shift where baby boomers are going to hand off to younger people. Finally.
I notice Toby Young chipping in, (twitter), apparently saying that we're spending too much money to save several hundred thousand old people. But again, he seems to view the virus as finite. That is, after killing the old, it will shut up shop and go back to bats, or whatever. How does he know this?
I would have thought that China and Korea offer evidence that a lockdown suppresses the virus. But as usual, it seems that all the critiques omit the nature of exponential growth. If you let it rip, it will rip big time.
The problem is that absent any other measures, this is still likely to be true when the lockdown ends, and you have wrecked the economy in the meantime.
(Disclaimer: I'm in favour of lockdown. But in my view the arguments are not as straightforward as anti-right wing critics would have you believe).
Well, if the advice from scientists was an endless series of lockdowns, or waves of the virus, we would be im Stuck. However, I think there is some light at the end of the tunnel, e.g., vaccine, the virus burning out, anti-viral meds. I'm not sure what the right wingers are advocating; do nothing has a horrible mathematical consequence.
What are the right wingers advocating? The only thing that sort of makes sense to me is that they think that as they can afford to stay home, they're safe behind the walls of their mansions so long as the workers in their shops, offices and factories keep making money for them. Then when someone develops a vaccine or the virus burns itself out they can emerge from their mansions to resume their lives of privilege with no harm done except a reduction in the pool of potential staff they can exploit to make more money. The lives of the poor are mere commodities that are expendable in their quest for greater personal wealth.
Comments
There are some disadvantages to an uncoordinated, state-level response. The first and most obvious is that states can't engage in deficit spending the same way the federal government can. This makes state budgets pro-cyclical, i.e. they're flush with funds when the economy is good and looking for loose change in the metaphorical couch during recessions. Needless to say when large sectors of the economy shut down (travel, hospitality, storefront retail) states have less money to confront any given crisis. Most states have "rainy day" funds set aside for downturns, but I don't have any idea whether those are funded well enough for the current situation.
The second problem with federal inaction is one of resource coordination. Governors are competing with each other (and with the private sector) for a limited pool of scant resources (masks, gloves, ventilators, . . . everything). It's not clear that the kind of bidding war that arises in such situations will lead to an optimal distribution of resources. In fact, it almost certainly won't. This is why competent federal coordination is key in such situations of shortage, not just for allocation of existing resources but because the federal government has a fairly wide array of powers to command the production of things, something beyond the powers of most state governments.
Finally, there's no guarantee that state governments won't also be woefully inadequate. If you live in New York or Washington state your government is already mobilized to save lives and meet the crisis. If you're in Mississippi or Florida, not so much. That doesn't even get to the fact that one of America's two major political parties has spent the last decade deliberately sabotaging the American healthcare system and making it less capable of responding to a crisis exactly like this one. This is not hyperbole. After John Roberts ineptly re-wrote the Affordable Care Act [PDF] a lot of Republican-controlled states passed up free federal money by not authorizing the ACA's Medicaid expansion. As a result a lot of rural hospitals in non-expansion states have closed down and a lot of poor residents of those states are reluctant to seek medical care because they don't have insurance.
So on one level the multi-level U.S. system of government provides some back-up when one part of it fails spectacularly, but governors and state legislatures are not a perfect fix for federal failures.
Of course not. But Boogie said she was afraid civil society in the US would collapse, which is quite frankly a ridiculous notion. The failures at the federal level mean more of us will die and the economic suffering will be deeper and longer-lasting. But the country will not completely fall apart.
Yes, that was what I read - just couldn't remember where! Thank you.
I am still afraid for the US.
People dying in enormous numbers and economic collapse will lead to fear. Millions of people with guns + fear isn’t a good equation.
I very dearly want to be wrong.
In the end, the most accurate number we will have is how many died.
Although, the time between first identified case and the highest spike, as well as the steepness of the decline afterwards will tell something of the effectiveness of the policies of each country.
Can't think why.
I'm sure someone with Mr. Orbán's record on freedom of the press would never abuse the power to imprison journalists without trial or recourse.
Some folks have already noted certain comparisons to another leader given dictatorial power only for the duration of the current crisis, said duration to be determined by the dictator in question.
Somebody in Latin America, too, I think. Maybe in the mess that Venezuela has become?
Oh for crying out loud.
About 675,000 people in the US died in the Spanish flu pandemic, out of a population of about 103 million - about .655% of the whole. If 200,000 out of the current population of over 330 million die of Covid-19, it won't come close to being as bad as the Spanish flu - about .06% of the whole. The US didn't come apart at the seams in 1918-19; what do you think is different now?
Boogie, there are ALWAYS idiots. Yet most people (yea, verily, even gun owners!) are smart enough to know that you can't shoot a virus (shaddup, all you microscope geeks!) and there's no point in shooting anything else.
I have no doubt that there will be one or two spectacular cases of a completely brainless dweeb doing something unthinkable with a gun which will then be reported worldwide as "the American response to coronavirus." Because of course there will.
But you seem to be envisioning rioting in the streets (not gonna happen--can't do that with a six foot distance
It really, really isn't like that. And I live in St. Louis, the so-called "murder capital of the U.S."
The vast majority of gun violence is gang-and-drug related and confined to certain neighborhoods (God help them). The next largest category as far as I can tell is domestic violence (God help them too, shut up at home together). This is still a tiny, tiny percentage of Americans.
There's really only one person I can think of who really, really, REALLY needs to be worried about being a victim of gun violence on account of the coronavirus, and he has Secret Security agents for that.
What makes you think Hungary was ever a democracy? Just because we called various countries democracies after the Soviet Union dissolved itself, doesn't mean that's what they are or were. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/25/world/europe/hungary-democracy-orban.html Any more than pre-Islamic revolution Iran was democratic. The pretense of democracy and trappings of it, don't make for a democratic country. And we like other countries to not be democratic, because it generally makes business easier if it is authoritarian, organized along totalitarian or mafia lines.
Sure, the rest of the world would carp if some nutjob goes on a shooting spree - 'The American response to Coronavirus' - but that's the price you pay for the Second Amendment - or, rather, for failing to apply the Second Amendment in a responsible way.
'It's the price we pay for freedom,' as an American gun advocate once crowed self-righteously at me from across the Atlantic on social media before I learned how futile it was even to discuss the subject.
There are plenty of other countries with similar - or worse - issues with guns. The US isn't unique in that respect. Let's keep things in perspective.
It's all relative. All countries have their particular weak spots and issues.
The US has the resources and infrastructure to cope. Some countries don't and that's the real worry. If it starts spreading in poorer parts of South East Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.
The Spanish Flu epidemic was particularly virulent among populations that hadn't been exposed to any flu virus before - or only to a limited extent. The Inuit and Pacific islanders were particularly hard hit.
The free elections that took place from 1990-2010, during which power often changed hands between rival parties. The 2010 election brought Orbán and Fidesz to power and they've spent the last decade dismantling Hungarian democracy so this recent switch to rule by decree is more like the obvious end point of a long slide than a sudden seizure of power, but that doesn't mean Hungarian democracy never existed.
In other words, It Can't Happen Here.
Wife and I found ourselves caught up in a "zombie battle" once. Seems like the college kids liked to use the underground parking lots on campus for their little battles. Often times they would use lasers to tag each other. We just found ourselves in one of those garages one night.
Getting back to the breakdown of American society: not going to happen. Often times, when faced with calamity, the divisions disappear and everyone pulls together.
By my estimation American society/governance has collapsed three times in its history and the "America" that emerged from the process was so radically different than the America that had existed before that it was essentially a new country.
1786-1789: Widespread financial crunch and unrest in the wake of the American Revolution leads to collapse of the Articles of Confederation and the adoption of America's current federal system and Constitution.
1861-1872: Disputes over free labor vs. slavery lead to the misnamed American Civil War followed by "a new birth of freedom" achieved through the Civil War Amendments and the (sadly incomplete) Reconstruction and re-ordering of a large chunk of the country.
1933-1945: The Great Depression and Second World War led to a thorough restructuring of American government, putting more power in the hands of the federal government at the expense of the states and the president at the expense of Congress. The social transformation of these years was also particularly stark, both domestically and in terms of foreign relations.
This seems to happen every 70-80 years or so. Seems like the U.S. is just about due for another.
You might consider, too, that this is getting mighty close to a pond war. Boogie's expressions of care and concern are kindly meant; that's not a problem.
I'll leave it at that.
Yes, quite.
Note to Lamb Chopped, I do not think Crœsos is suggesting utter destruction. Transformation can build on the past.
I have a gut feel about the UK that we will return to a 'new normal'. It remains to be seen what that will look like. We seriously underestimated the risk and the consequences, otherwise we would have been better prepared.
Disaster planning is a normal feature of the work of public authorities here, but it clearly didn't cover this situation all that well. We need to do better on that front. So does the USA. On that I should think we can reach across the pond and agree.
I share some of the same concerns as you (and Croesos and others). I don't know what will happen, and I sure don't want bad stuff to happen--but reality generally run focus groups ahead of time to get people's opinions.
However, I can't really live in that mindspace--too stressful and painful. So I try to keep it to occasional thoughts.
LC--
Was your Cheerios comment directed at Croesos? If so, he's an American, AFAIK, so there can't be a pond war between you.
That said, right now being in delivery is much less vulnerable than traditional retail.
There should be a "doesn't" right after "reality". Sorry.
AIUI: Amazon warehouse workers go on strike tomorrow, over virus safety issues and other things. Delivery service Insta-Cart went on strike today, for similar reasons.
If the management of each company has any sense at all, they'll give in quickly. If the workers at both companies have any sense at all, they'll realize they can leverage the urgent need people staying at home have for purchase and delivery of essentials. If the management doesn't give in, they'll miss all those extra profits.
If they do give in, they can do a PR spin of being kind to their workers (who, they've just remembered, are people, after all); caring about the lives of the workers and customers; and generally being good guys, gosh darn it.
The listings are in the format:
X. Country - [# of known cases] ([active] / [recovered] / [dead]) [%fatality rate]
Fatality rates are only listed for countries where the number of resolved cases (recovered + dead) exceeds the number of known active cases by a ratio of at least 2:1. Italics indicate authoritarian countries whose official statistics are suspect. Other country's statistics are suspect if their testing regimes are substandard.
Notably, the number of deaths in the United States has now surpassed the number killed in the 9/11 attacks.
Since the last compilation no nations have joined this particular club.
I don't know about despair, but I remain in the club of those who think life will be radically different after all this. Paris' second airport, Orly, usually 90,000 passengers per day, has just closed to all regular traffic ('last and final call before the gates close') for an unspecified period. Traffic has moved to Charles de Gaulle which as a result expects to see 10,000 passengers per day compared to a usual 200,000. I can't see Orly reopening any time soon. Just thinking about the infrastructure and immediate and knock-on economic implications of that one facility closing makes my head spin, before multiplying it out to every other closed factory and facility across the country.
I don’t think being concerned and realistic is despairing.
But maybe I need to shut up now as I’m clearly not doing any good either. I will stick to the All Saints thread about the virus instead of posting here.
Said with love.
I think also, we shouldn’t underestimate the amount that *has* worked. Previous planning has left us with lots or processes and systems that have kicked in effectively. And those processes and systems are part of the toolset being used to overcome the areas where we are lacking.
From what I've seen, over the last few years such desk-top exercises of 'flu pandemics have highlighted the fact that the NHS doesn't have sufficient ICU capacity and ventilator availability (which includes both physical infrastructure and numbers of trained staff), that coping with a 'flu pandemic would need to involve rapid emplacement of social distancing to slow the build-up of the number of critical cases to spread them out and that there would need to be an investment in the long term build-up of the NHS capacity so that in the event of a pandemic there would be better provision of critical resources. The disaster management preparation system did what it was supposed to; the failings were that the government ignored the advice of the experts - both before the current outbreak by refusing to invest in the NHS and public education (how many here had heard of "social distancing" before the start of this year? How many knew that a pandemic response would involve restrictions on movement? If you had heard of these, how well did the public understand why these are needed? Judging by the number of people flouting the instructions to stay in and avoid close contact with others, or panic buying in supermarkets, these messages had not sunk into the bulk of the public before the emergency), and once the outbreak occurred by being slow to introduce social distancing.
Other countries have had their own versions of failing to learn from their disaster management preparations. In the US a well publicised example would be failure to maintain funding for specialist response teams in the federal CDC.
We've learnt our lessons, and in the next few years we're going to see a maintenance of pandemic control infrastructure ... which will slowly decline. As I said, I've been involved in preparations for radiological or nuclear disaster over the years. We have a timeline of such disasters and responses: the disaster happens, everyone dashes around doing whatever they can to respond without proper training and equipment; we learn how we should have responded and we move from a reactive "oh, my God we must do something!" to a pro-active "let's think through what we can do and work out the best approach" phase; the response moves from dealing with immediate consequences to recovery and returning to normality; we spend a few years learning from the emergency, writing reports on what worked and what didn't, doing research to develop better ways to respond etc; time passes and we forget what was learnt, those who coordinated the emergency retire, government changes and asks whether they need to spend so much money on this ... everything learnt is forgotten and the infrastructure put in during those first few post-emergency years degrades. Then a disaster happens ... and we're back to the beginning.
Story in the Sunday Telegraph, behind a paywall, although they are offering a month free, so I can only get to the introduction:
I found it interesting that this is a report from the Torygraph.
Thankyou, @Lyda. I found that intensely moving, especially as it was recorded back in 2008.
I learned last night that this contingency was initially designed as part of the disaster planning for dealing with a terrorist attack, rather than a pandemic. They quickly realised that it would be a useful strategy in the current situation.
I assume what happened is that the buying was down to people having to stock up, plus shifting purchases from outlets to having to provide more of their meals themselves, and the supply chains are slowly adjusting. The figures being bandied around were about 2bn extra spend over one month -- which sounds like a lot, but compares to 3.7bn spent per week at the supermarkets.
I assume also that selection and the supply of some fresh food will be disrupted in the medium term, but at the moment anyway people will remain able to get basics and feed themselves.
Toilet paper, and tomato soup, still seem to be the new gold, though...
I would have thought that China and Korea offer evidence that a lockdown suppresses the virus. But as usual, it seems that all the critiques omit the nature of exponential growth. If you let it rip, it will rip big time.
A UK example of this opposition is Peter Hitchens, and an article still on the Daily Mail website, "this great Panic is foolish".
Indeed. Unless another pandemic follows very closely on the the heels of this one, we will be starting from scratch.
The problem is that absent any other measures, this is still likely to be true when the lockdown ends, and you have wrecked the economy in the meantime.
(Disclaimer: I'm in favour of lockdown. But in my view the arguments are not as straightforward as anti-right wing critics would have you believe).
Well, if the advice from scientists was an endless series of lockdowns, or waves of the virus, we would be im Stuck. However, I think there is some light at the end of the tunnel, e.g., vaccine, the virus burning out, anti-viral meds. I'm not sure what the right wingers are advocating; do nothing has a horrible mathematical consequence.
As for resets of societies, this one is probably part of the generational shift where baby boomers are going to hand off to younger people. Finally.