COVID-2019 in America, effect on politics and economy

[Double Edge]

Donald Trump inherited a good economy when he took office. All he had to do was stay the course. The "improvement" was getting into trade wars like a bull in a china shop and massive tax cuts mostly for the wealthy (while throwing a few coins at the working class). What else do these "people" tell you?

Without Trump you'd have gone into a recession

It will come down, as it always has, to the last 6 months of his presidency.

Right, so they need to do something in the last quarter

We're not talking about the United States. We're talking about D-O-N-A-L-D J-O-H-N T-R-U-M-P

I'm talking about the US. You're talking about Trump : )

[Ironduke]

Without Trump you'd have gone into a recession

You do realize that's an unprovable assertion, right?

You can say the economy grew, it continued to grow, but you can't make unprovable assertions and expect to be taken seriously.

Or do you have some window that allows you to view into an alternate universe, identical up to a point of divergence where Trump lost the electoral college in 2016? Did you take any snapshots of economic figures from this alternate universe you apparently have a window to?

[Ironduke]

I've seen various claims that "the fatality rate is actually closer to 0.1%" thrown around.

As of today:

• 0.13% of everybody in New York State is dead from COVID-19, based on the current official count
• that number is in all likelihood going to continue to increase
• the number of excess deaths in New York since March is greater than the number of deaths officially attributed to COVID-19

Since we know, quite probably:

• that 100% of New York State's population has not been infected, and
• we won't be down to 0 new infections and 0 new deaths today

It's safe to extrapolate based on the evidence available to us that the fatality rate for infections is at least several times higher than 0.13%.

[tbm3fan]

Has form for this, which is one of the reasons I stopped wasting my time long before COVID kicked off. I have watched you all try to break through the confirmation bias & bullshit firm in the knowledge that you were wasting your time. Facts can't fix that which isn't based in facts to begin with. I learned that the hard way on a completely different topic. Now you & everyone else has too.

Not bothering to engage is way less stressful, believe me.

I agree and I am out as lead is too dense to get through...

One last thing to note is that it seems death tolls in New York are definitely down but the tolls in the Midwest are rising. Many states were single digits and yesterday most were double digits. Pennsylvania had a bad day. Looks like the wave is moving inward to the Republican rural states that were supposed to be immune because they were rural so says their Governors. The end of May, beginning right around Memorial Day, looks to me to be an important marker. Places your bets for under or over...

[TopHatter]

Without Trump you'd have gone into a recession

Bullshit. And you have zero proof of that.

I'm talking about the US. You're talking about Trump : )

Pretty weak attempt to reframe the argument, even for you, but you do realize that past posts are visible, and quotable, right?

So here's the thread flow....notice how both of us, you and I, were talking about Donald Trump, from the very start and the US as a whole never entered into the discussion?

Maryland called in National Guard troops to defend coronavirus tests from South Korea against seizure

Smart move as long as Trump is in the White House: Secure anything of value with armed guards.

Hey speaking of our favorite dementia patient, remember when he said that anybody who wanted to get tested, could get tested?

Individual states can get the same treatment he mets out to foreign countries is the surprising lesson here.

Surprising? Are you serious? What in the blue hell is "surprising" about this to you?

Because i didn't think he'd do it to his own.

All that hard ball is to make American great again.

Trump has been in office 3+ years and you didn't think he would do it to his "own"? Seriously?

Yes, why would that be unreasonable to say in a national crisis.

See Rule #3 Donald Trump never cares about anybody but himself. Whatever he does or says, he'll do for his own benefit, no one elses.

So either you have the same attention span as Donald Trump (on par with a not-terribly-intelligent gnat) or you're trolling. Which is it?

[Ironduke]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...h-toll-us.html
What Is the Real Coronavirus Toll in Each State?

As the coronavirus pandemic cuts through the country, it is leaving behind large numbers of deaths that surpass those of recent history. A New York Times analysis of state data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows just how many lives are being lost in the pandemic in each place — as the virus kills some people directly, and other lives are lost to an overwhelmed health care system and fears about using it.

Our analysis examines deaths from all causes, beginning in mid-March when the virus took hold in the country, and examines every state with reliable data. The death count so far is not uniform around the nation. Some places have seen staggering death tolls, while others have seen smaller aberrations from historic patterns. In some states, the number of deaths so far looks roughly in line with those in a typical year, suggesting that the virus and its effects throughout medicine and society have not yet had a major impact on survival.

New York City, long the epicenter of the U.S. outbreak, has experienced the most extreme increase in deaths, which surged to six times the usual number. Altogether, since mid-March deaths there are 23,000 higher than normal.



All of these numbers are likely to be a substantial undercount of the ultimate death toll, since death counting takes time and many states are weeks or months behind in reporting.

But comparing recent totals of deaths from all causes can provide a more complete picture of the pandemic’s impact than tracking only deaths of people with confirmed diagnoses. Indeed, in nearly every state with an unusual number of deaths in recent weeks, that number is higher than the state’s reported number of deaths from Covid-19. Epidemiologists refer to fatalities in that gap between the observed and normal numbers of deaths as “excess deaths.”

Measuring excess deaths is crude because it does not capture all the details of how people died. But many epidemiologists believe it is the best way to measure the impact of the virus in real time. It shows how the virus is altering normal patterns of mortality where it strikes and undermines arguments that it is merely killing vulnerable people who would have died anyway.

Our charts show weekly deaths above or below normal in each state through the most recent week, with data the C.D.C. estimates to be at least 90 percent complete. Those determinations are based on states’ speed at reporting deaths in the past, and they mean that these state charts show death trends for slightly different time periods.

We supplemented the C.D.C. data with any coronavirus deaths that have been reported by The Times that have not yet been added to the C.D.C. database. Those totals were compared with a simple model of expected deaths based on the number of deaths in the past five years, adjusted to account for trends over time, like population changes. Public health researchers use such methods to measure the impact of catastrophic events when official measures of mortality are flawed.

Measuring excess deaths does not tell us precisely how each person died. It is likely that most of the excess deaths in this period are because of the coronavirus itself, given the dangerousness of the virus and the well-documented problems with testing. But it is also possible that deaths from other causes have risen too, as hospitals have become stressed and people have been scared to seek care for ailments that are typically survivable. Some causes of death may be declining, as people stay inside more, drive less and limit their contact with others.

Even in a normal year, it takes up to eight weeks for full death counts to be reported by the C.D.C. But this is not a normal year, and it is possible that because of the unusual number of recent deaths and the stresses they are placing on medical examiners and public health officials, the totals will take even longer than usual to become complete. We will keep updating the numbers regularly as new data becomes available.

Where deaths are slightly above normal

In a larger group of states, the increases in deaths were more modest during the early phase of the pandemic, but deaths are still higher than normal.

Where deaths look normal, in the data reported so far

There are still some states that appear to have been largely spared from an unusual number of deaths during this period. In those places, the patterns of death look roughly similar to those in recent years. A few states in this category have seen their fortunes worsen in recent weeks, and they may begin showing excess deaths as more weeks of complete data are reported.

In some of these states, deaths are actually below the normal trend. That may be because of data reporting lags. But it could be because of the pandemic, too: Stay-at-home orders may be lowering death rates from car accidents in some places, or flu in others.

How excess deaths compare with the official coronavirus counts

In nearly every state with more deaths than normal, the total number of them exceeded the official number of measured Covid-19 deaths. Given the limitations on coronavirus testing in the United States, this gap is not a big surprise. Similar gaps have been found in other countries with high numbers of Covid-19 deaths.

Our analysis aims to show mortality statistics for as much of the country as possible, but there are some places that are so far behind in submitting death certificates to the C.D.C. that comparing their reported totals to historical trends would not show much. In Connecticut, for example, zero deaths have been reported to the federal government at all since February 1.

Several other states and Puerto Rico have less extreme data lags, but are far enough behind that the C.D.C. does not recommend relying on their recent death reporting. In Pennsylvania and Ohio, death reporting seems to be lagging far behind the normal rate all year, according to the C.D.C., even though their reporting is usually more timely, so we have omitted data from them as well. The complete list of missing places is: Alaska, Connecticut, Louisiana, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia.

[Double Edge]

You do realize that's an unprovable assertion, right?

You can say the economy grew, it continued to grow, but you can't make unprovable assertions and expect to be taken seriously.

Or do you have some window that allows you to view into an alternate universe, identical up to a point of divergence where Trump lost the electoral college in 2016? Did you take any snapshots of economic figures from this alternate universe you apparently have a window to?

He asked what else i heard so i answered. A comment i got just two days ago.

What i understand it to mean is the economy improved under Trump, this is a general impression i've got with people who support him.

What it implies is if he were not elected then you would not have done as well.

Whether a recession automatically follows i can't say for certain. I've not looked at this to any extent.

All to say better off with Trump in office.

Unemployment down, stock market up

He makes people feel good. He's an excellent communicator. This was very apparent in his debates which is why its very important to listen to him and not some second hand account by your rambunctious media.

If see a repeat of 2004 coming up. All opposition could do was bash Bush. What happened ? he got a second term.

My mistake was listening to the opposition back then. It came as a shock.

So i hang out in the right echo chambers these days. As explained earlier right is defined by the commentators that do not have a problem with the govt. Less shocks that way.

What i'm sensitive to is critiques by the supporters. People that have been following policy, examining the results and comparing with what we were told at the time to expect. These are far more potent than anything the opposition could dream of. Not easy to counter either.

Dissent in the ranks so to speak. Whether its grows. Do more also share the same sentiment. If so then things are going to be dicey.

How to tell if that is happening in his base ? the only way he loses is if his base weakens.

He's made it through the Mueller & Impeachement nonsense, if anything that's vindicated him in the eyes of his base.

[Double Edge]

Bullshit. And you have zero proof of that.

I don't need any proof of it. You asked i answered. That's the sentiment. An assertion

If people think they will be better off with him despite this pandemic he will win. Simple as.

Pretty weak attempt to reframe the argument, even for you, but you do realize that past posts are visible, and quotable, right?

So here's the thread flow....notice how both of us, you and I, were talking about Donald Trump, from the very start and the US as a whole never entered into the discussion?

What is the point of this inquisition ?

I've told you what i've thought and that's it.

So either you have the same attention span as Donald Trump (on par with a not-terribly-intelligent gnat) or you're trolling. Which is it?

I have no problems with him. If you hate him that's your problem.

Oh and for future reference. I don't troll. Waste of time.

In some lesser places, the moment you question things or say anything that is at odds with the convention you are charged with trolling. How can i be trolling if i'm supporting your govt ?

This is all going OT for me, i'm here to understand how the US is dealing with this pandemic.

Can we get back to that.

[Double Edge]

I've seen various claims that "the fatality rate is actually closer to 0.1%" thrown around.

As of today:

• 0.13% of everybody in New York State is dead from COVID-19, based on the current official count
• that number is in all likelihood going to continue to increase
• the number of excess deaths in New York since March is greater than the number of deaths officially attributed to COVID-19

Since we know, quite probably:

• that 100% of New York State's population has not been infected, and
• we won't be down to 0 new infections and 0 new deaths today

It's safe to extrapolate based on the evidence available to us that the fatality rate for infections is at least several times higher than 0.13%.

Right now, the focus is on opening up the economy. In a way that a second wave does not come back and force a re-closure.

There are two variables to keep in mind, Infection Fatality Rate & Number of deaths.

With those two variables you can estimate how much of the population has been infected.

If one of those variables is incorrect then you can over estimate infection. If that happens unwinding the lock down will cause a second wave. If fewer people than estimated are infected.

Get it right and number of infections and deaths will increase but not to a point where it overwhelms the health infrastructure.

This is the direction countries with community transmission are heading towards. Living with this bloody virus. This part i'm finding very hard to accept. I'm wearing a mask for at least a year wherever i go.

So it is important to have confidence in those two variables. You understand now why i was questioning the death counts.

How close to 0 or 1 matters a big deal as it will skew the estimates of infected by a wide margin. More antibody testing will have to be done in different cities. Like the ones conducted in NYC & Santa Clara.

I'm not clear whether IFR can be compared between cities. Maybe if demographics are similar.

There will be trial and error, calibrated unwinding, monitoring, proceeding or rolling back.

[DOR]

Documenting the Ugly

Non-farm private payroll dropped 15.7% from March to April, knocking the total back by over nine years, to January 2011.
That’s 20,236,067 fewer jobs.


Although manufacturing (in this measure) comprises about twice as many people as construction, the share of nation-wide, total job losses in the former was 8.3%, and in construction 12.2%.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NPPTTL

[snapper]

I suspect they are over counting and hey this why your graph goes skywards : )

How is cause of death recorded in the UK ? died of or died with

What i find odd with the UK stats is no recovered are listed. Why ?

It's not like every one that gets infected dies. Why aren't the ones that recover being accounted for.

Recovered here means tested negative twice as in the person immune system beat the virus.

My internet in the mid Atlantic is sketchy at best (high pressure or a passing cargo ship) but as far as I know the UK was undercounting deaths due to covid19 at first in that only those who had tested positive and subsequently died in hospital were counted as died due covid19. This left out all those who died elsewhere, at home or in care homes. I am not sure if they have included those fatalities yet.

But it not a matter of how you count the numbers. Some I believe have compared the fight against this virus as a 'war' and if we continue that metaphor you are arguing that only those killed in action by the enemy should count as victims - and maybe not even all of those either since some will have had 'underlying problems'. Those who step on mines, simply vanish missing in action, or succumb to injuries incurred in action later it seems you would argue - do not die directly from the actions of the enemy; there is no direct cause and effect but only a contingent association. So a person who is injured in battle with the enemy may die subsequently from septicemia - not direct enemy fire - and therefore should not be counted as a victim of war. But this missing the wood for the trees. If there were no war there would be no excess deaths.

Napoleon crossed the Nieman to Moscow with 1m troops it is said, returned with 100,000 but the Muscovites did not kill 900,000, at the one main battle Battle of Borodino the Grand Armee sustained around 28,000 casualties, yet they were victims of the war.

[Ironduke]

You understand now why i was questioning the death counts.

That's presumptuous.

The notion that the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 have been overcounted is complete and utter bullshit. The notion that the presence of an underlying condition means the death of a COVID-19 infected "doesn't count" is complete and utter bullshit. The notion that once we reached the same number of tests per million as South Korea did, that somehow this metric, ignoring the vastly different situations, meant it was "time to relax", is complete and utter bullshit.

This is all going OT for me, i'm here to understand how the US is dealing with this pandemic.

All I see is the peddling of non-cogent arguments full of nonsensical obfuscation. I don't really see you trying to "understand" anything. You interpret and seek out information that confirms your bias.

[Double Edge]

My internet in the mid Atlantic is sketchy at best (high pressure or a passing cargo ship) but as far as I know the UK was undercounting deaths due to covid19 at first in that only those who had tested positive and subsequently died in hospital were counted as died due covid19. This left out all those who died elsewhere, at home or in care homes. I am not sure if they have included those fatalities yet.

This is one of those marginal cases. People say this is why China's numbers are lower. But the question of what they died of still remains isn't it.

People who need treatment for co-morbidities, afraid to go to the hospital because they fear they will catch C19 end up dying for lack of treatment which would have saved them. Hospitals converting wards to C19 because there is a surge of C19 are less able to treat those with other conditions.

The question is under counting in this instance by how much. If the hospitals can handle their usual load then it might not be significant. If they are overwhelmed then its any one's guess. We will only know after some time when comparing deaths of various diseases from previous years and seeing which lines dipped during the present period.

But it not a matter of how you count the numbers. Some I believe have compared the fight against this virus as a 'war' and if we continue that metaphor you are arguing that only those killed in action by the enemy should count as victims - and maybe not even all of those either since some will have had 'underlying problems'. Those who step on mines, simply vanish missing in action, or succumb to injuries incurred in action later it seems you would argue - do not die directly from the actions of the enemy; there is no direct cause and effect but only a contingent association. So a person who is injured in battle with the enemy may die subsequently from septicemia - not direct enemy fire - and therefore should not be counted as a victim of war. But this missing the wood for the trees. If there were no war there would be no excess deaths.

Napoleon crossed the Nieman to Moscow with 1m troops it is said, returned with 100,000 but the Muscovites did not kill 900,000, at the one main battle Battle of Borodino the Grand Armee sustained around 28,000 casualties, yet they were victims of the war.

This is why its a controversy isn't it. You're arguing for most inclusive definition. I've presented an argument against.

If the patients die of specific conditions to do with the disease lungs etc, are confirmed positive then they will be included.

[Double Edge]

That's presumptuous.

If you want to unwind a lockdown and have some idea of it succeeding than IFR & number of deaths can give an estimate of infected.

If you do not use those parameters then they are not important. In which case i wonder how would you think about how much to unwind and how fast. How is your govt going about unwinding the lock down.

The notion that the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 have been overcounted is complete and utter bullshit. The notion that the presence of an underlying condition means the death of a COVID-19 infected "doesn't count" is complete and utter bullshit. The notion that once we reached the same number of tests per million as South Korea did, that somehow this metric, ignoring the vastly different situations, meant it was "time to relax", is complete and utter bullshit.

Did you see that NYC graph of deaths i posted. They are including people that have not been tested (probables) in the death list.

Explain that ?

Knowing that it takes several test to find a positive don't you think they are over counting there.

Nobody has addressed that post of mine to date.

All I see is the peddling of non-cogent arguments full of nonsensical obfuscation. I don't really see you trying to "understand" anything. You interpret and seek out information that confirms your bias.

Yeah there's 50 states to look at. I've only done two. Time dude.

You never listened to what that prof said either. I'd love to see you challenge what he said.

I'm amazed at the push back to the suggestion over counting could have occurred.

[snapper]

This is why its a controversy isn't it. You're arguing for most inclusive definition. I've presented an argument against.

If the patients die of specific conditions to do with the disease lungs etc, are confirmed positive then they will be included.

No it is not a 'controversy'. Napoleon lost 900,000 or so men due to his invasion of Muscovy. What direct causes, cold or the bayonets of their enemies makes no difference. Sure some would have died had he not ordered the invasion but not half as many. It's only you who thinks that the subsequent casualties of a pandemic or war bear no relation to the first cause. It is like saying that when playing snooker (or pool) only the first interaction of the cue ball can be considered the consequence of the players shot. That is not half the story - the cue ball hits another ball which often hits another ball - or several - and though unintended directly may result in one ball being pocketed or positioned close to a pocket. Chain reactions in science are not regarded as "Oh well it was that electron that split that atom' but as what starts it and how it ends. You have to see the bigger picture to put the minutiae into context.