Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 20 of 2908 Posts

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
Ryan. You've mentioned a few times an increase in suicides due to economic hardships of severe recessions. You do realise that there is a lower premature death rate in times of recession, no?
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts


 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
It's amazing how much it costs when people can't be trusted at times where it really matters!


@Kelli, 1 area I considered in the modern era is significantly reduced pollution and particulates in cities. The USA has approximately 8 people die prematurely as a result of urban pollution every single day. Los Angeles sky at the moment looks pristine! This number will be reduced to almost zero. Then you have the road toll, etc etc.
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
Ryan, whilst New York is definitely ahead of us, it's not by that far, only a week or so at trajectories without change. Hopefully the current isolation policies are helping to avoid this.

 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
Ive already said isolate those at risk. No need to shutdown entire industries.

Stopping all international flights is drastic, from hot spots maybe makes sense, but domestic is over the top.
Which countries should we still have leisure flights to?
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
Agree. If the PM had advice to limit public gatherings, it would have been done immediately if it wasn't for the disruptions. He should've taken that advice, led by example and stated that he would no longer attend.

He was, at that stage, doing his usual, prioritise the immediate economy over all else.
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
I give up, you guys will believe whatever your bias leads you to believe. If he didn’t follow the official advice at that time, you would be complaining about that - that he had one set of advice for the public and followed another set of advice for himself, looking out for himself and sending mixed messages.
So if he is saying that we need to stop meeting in large gatherings, and still thinks it is ok to go to a large gathering, what is your viewpoint on that?

Or does the virus wait until we legislate that we can't gather?
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
It's more that the worst thing about the handling of this situation has been the communication and the messaging.

What is his skill set again?


It needs to be kept simple.

Why don't we just have a UBI set at a certain amount with a levy for the amount of the UBI set at another amount. This massively reduces issues like Centrelink lines both physically and online and it massively removes the ambiguity and confusion about who can access it and who can't.


Regards to messaging, it should be clear and simple so we don't end up with the Hewson Birthday Cake issue. Morrison, knowing that restrictions were always going to escalate, should be pre-empting these and lead by example. No wonder people were flooding Bondi etc.
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
Regardless, there have been 2 reprehensible things that have occured since the start. The lack of control with the cruise ship in Sydney, both the isolation and the customs. And that Crown Casino were given an exemption to the separation requirements early on.

It's not a partisan thing, it's an obvious criticism, just like with Morrisons handling, whilst not reprehensible, definitely very clumsy.
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
Hexter, I actually completely agree we are doing better than many other countries, 100%, however there are other countries that are also clearly doing better than us.
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
So we currently have 0.018% of the population infected and 0.00008% of the population have died from coronavirus. So based on the stimulus package of approx 200billion (so far) thats $44million for each infection and $10.5 billion for each premature death of an elderly person. The economic pain is not being shared equally amongst Australia's residents with whole industries in the private sector being decimated whilst public sector workers (some with little to do now) are largely unaffected. Public sector employees (including politicians) should be hit with an immediate 25% pay cut across the board. They have been receiving pay increases that far exceed the size of the private sector over the last few years
What would have been the total number of cases or deaths if no action was taken at all?


Do you have any risk management skills at all, or is it always about the immediate windfall for you?
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
What I said was based on the facts as they stood yesterday and yes, I have a fair idea of what the economic costs would be of doing nothing at all, but this would all be far too politically incorrect to rationally debate for a lot of people on this forum. There is a massive risk/return tradeoff to saving the lives of a relatively small co-hort of the population who are largely "retired" and a drain on the public finances anyway. Furthermore, you could raise arguments around why the healthy should sacrifice their wealth to prevent the early death of a cohort who have chosen to compromise their lung capacity through decades of smoking (despite the warnings). There are many ethical questions the current situation raises, and the longer this goes on, the more these issues will be debated. There will be increased domestic violence, suicides, crime and many people thrown permanently into poverty, the longer this crisis goes on.

Re my risk management skills, well the federal government, state government and private sector corporates are happy to pay my consulting business good rates for this sort of advice, so your opinion means little to me
Sure, they're facts. But the facts are not relavent to your point.

Do you also complain that the money spent on hospitals seems huge considering the relatively few numbers that die in them? Or is it better to look at the savings and benefits created by that money?
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
For his first question, the level of deadliness is only one element that needs to be assessed. The second is the level of infection. Because there is no or little immunity and no vaccine, this level is much much higher than other corona viruses. It's also about how rapidly it spreads. If all of those infections happen in a 1 month period, that is far far worse than if it is over a 4 month period.

The second, again, the regular flu has vaccines, and, if 20,000 people died, I would argue that the hospitals were not equipped to handle it.

The third question is being tested now. If it was the first approach, the level of risk is huge.

Whilst the fourth point is critically important, unless there is something else that has magically skyrocketed deaths at the exact time that Coronavirus has peaked likely needs significant evidence that Coronavirus is not causing an overloading of the hospital system. As it is clear that the hospital system is being significantly overloaded in all areas where numbers of Coronavirus patients are also significant. Correlation? Maybe. However I am yet to hear a theory of what is overloading these hospitals if it is not Coronavirus. Even the video hasn't even tried to explain this.


I guess the answer will be known with Belarus, Indonesia, India and the third world will show what will happen as they either not shutting down or they have no ability to control things



There are some critical questions:

1. If it is a big event, do you wait until you have the data to act, when the time to act will be after the data is available.
2. What is causing the deaths if not for Coronavirus at such massive numbers at conveniently the same time as coronavirus.
3. The countries that have had very low deaths per capita and are at a more mature stage are the ones that have targeted protecting people from coronavirus.


Let's talk in 2 weeks after we know more regarding the chaos in the USA who were very late to the party.
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
Hexter, which previous flu/virus has caused hospitals to run out of PPE and equipment so early in the process?
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
Locke, refer to my previous post to Ryan which show that fewer lives are lost in recessions than otherwise.
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
The regular flu does have vaccinations but many people still die even though they have vaccinations because the flu shot NEVER guarantees you are protected against all the current seasonal flu's.
I don't understand how this helps your point in any way whatsoever. In fact, the opposite. If there was no vaccine, you would see the lock downs we have now.
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
You cannot maintain this type of lock down indefinitely. The consequences will absolutely be worse than the problem we have now.

The PPE thing is complicated. For example, the JIT supply lines in the US was a result of hospital administrations relying on Just in Time and guess where all the manufacturing went? China. The need for PPE is, as far as I can read thus far, being met now in most jurisdictions.

To answer KJ. I can only conjecture from what I have read. Well first of all, a lot of PPE was shipped to China a month ago. I thought this knowledge would have been well know. The SMH had a few articles about this.

Also whom are we testing? The criteria is still strict and this captures the highest risk people (quite rightfully) and does not capture the asymptomatic and definitely not those with mild affects.

After general population sampling, if we DO find it is out there in the general population, the need for a hard lock down is then null and void. I would not be surprised, (going by all these articles by epidemiologists) that it is more out in the Gen pop than people wish to think. Ironically, this may be the saving thing - the already establishment of a herd immunity that we are currently unaware of.

A lot of leading epidemiologists are questioning the strategy of hard core lock downs. It's not me. It's not my opinion. I'm just linking to it. Like always, I'm willing to change what I think and I will say this - I think this whole thing? Something does not add up. Maybe that's for nefarious reasons, maybe that's due to it just being something the world has not had to deal with before and is reacting in a way that we may see later, was not the best way. Panic. Panic is the enemy. I also feel misinformation, or at least, sensationalized information from all levels has led to crazy things.

I know a friend on a 5 acre property that literally will not allow anyone on their property because they believe this virus is somehow more airborne than other viruses. This is simply not true:


My friend with the 5 acre property went and saw her other friend on a large property and when she went on her property to visit? I kid you not, her friend drew a knife on her. This is insane.

In saying that, I totally am on board with the 1.5m rule and the social distancing because it's astute and anything that trains the public in mitigating cross contamination is a good thing.
No-one is saying we lock down indefinitely. That's never been the aim or the intent.

PPE was shipped to China when they were overwhelmed. We weren't. Is that not sensible?

We have very high testing rates. Testing only stops deaths if you can then target isolations.


We do need to test the general population when we have the ability to.

You say a lot of epidemiologists are questioning the strategy. Whereas a lot are highly supportive of the strategy. Saying there are plenty that support your viewpoint on this doesn't really help your argument when the viewpoints of the profession is so divided.



I can't help anecdotal evidence of people going overboard.
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
If we minimised the spread in China, before we knew the extent, we help them to manage the issue with fewer people contracting than if they didn't have appropriate PPE. The real complaint should have been that local companies were not ramping up manufacturing of the PPE to build greater stockpiles at that time just in case.


The extra testing is mostly for tracing purposes. Regarding data we should be looking at the ratio of hospitalisations and deaths. You will never test the entire population regularly enough to get sufficiently accurate data to achieve what you are wanting.



Of course there are differing viewpoints within the epidemiological community. No-one is denying that, however what I am saying is that so far, is that those countries that have aligned with this thinking, and are far enough along the line, are having massive issues with hospital and ICU space as well as sufficient materials. You are putting them forward in a way that assumes it trumps the existing way of thinking and that the approach we are taking is overkill as a result.


There is general agreement that we need more data. There is general agreement that there are many more cases that aren't being tested. The biggest disagreements are the max scale that the pandemic will reach (depends on the modelling and assumptions used) and whether it's acceptable to trade off deaths for the economy and where this kicks in.








On your last point, it absolutely hasn't gone over my head. Of course Germany are testing far higher than Italy, but my point being, it doesn't matter how much you test, people either have it or they don't, and if a country reaches a certain level, it becomes exponentially bad as it will start killing otherwise healthy people for other reasons. This has happened in China, Italy, Spain and likely in New York and other places.


As we have discussed, watch places like Sweden and Belarus over the next month and we will see who got it right.
 

·
...........
Joined
·
27,569 Posts
South Korea is an example of a country that acted immediately and tested extensively very early. The testing wasn't for data purposes, it was for tracing purposes. This has been my point all along.

Also, be aware that Australia's death rate is less than a third of South Korea's by population so far, granted at different stages in the spread.
 
1 - 20 of 2908 Posts
Top