2020 Dumpster Fire (Enter at your own risk)

[Oxbow6]

20 minutes ago, Nodak78 said:

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/04/coronavirus-in-five-states.php

 

Got a buddy that's an analytical engineer. His projection timeframe wise for ND to reach the roughly 370 death estimated by IHME is just under 4 years if the current social measures and virus rates were to be kept in place. Not sure if his analysis is any better than IHME or whatever model Walz is going by but was interesting to listen to.

...and I'll take the under on the 370 by 8/4.

[wasmania]

3 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:

Got a buddy that's an analytical engineer. His projection timeframe wise for ND to reach the roughly 370 death estimated by IHME is just under 4 years if the current social measures and virus rates were to be kept in place. Not sure if his analysis is any better than IHME or whatever model Walz is going by but was interesting to listen to.

because anybody can do epidemiology.

 

[Oxbow6]

1 minute ago, wasmania said:

because anybody can do epidemiology.

 

And obviously not many do it well.

[dynato]

6 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:

Got a buddy that's an analytical engineer. His projection timeframe wise for ND to reach the roughly 370 death estimated by IHME is just under 4 years if the current social measures and virus rates were to be kept in place. Not sure if his analysis is any better than IHME or whatever model Walz is going by but was interesting to listen to.

...and I'll take the under on the 370 by 8/4.

To understand the models, you need to take into consideration their assumptions used to make them, and their confidence intervals.

His assumption, extending current social measures and sheltering being extended for four years, is a tough one to agree with. 

The IHME model assumes a swift drop off in death toll, rather than a slow decline from the peak. They also assume that 40/50 states will have single digit daily deaths after mid May.

The U of M model, used by Walz, assumes a plateau at the peak, while additional deaths slowly tailor off to a lower plateau.

[wasmania]

14 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:

And obviously not many do it well.

Ok. I am a data science guy. MBA Stats.  30 years of logistic regression etc for commerce and credit.   Models are only as good as the underlying data. How relevant is the past history?  how should the current data be sliced by region/age/whatever etc.  Many more data hygiene and timing questions.  Any honest pro is using models to guide planning and knows full well that ' no plan outlasts contact with the enemy'.    You seem to hold them to a higher stand for some reason.

[NoiseInsideMyHead]

2 hours ago, UNDlaw80 said:

To add to that....

Since this country still doesn't have adequate testing available for everybody, some researchers have been analyzing sewage a method of tracking Covid rates.  Some interesting initial findings: 

 

Sewage analysis suggests a New England metro area with fewer than 500 COVID-19 cases may have exponentially more

https://abcnews.go.com/US/sewage-analysis-suggests-england-metro-area-fewer-500/story?id=70068740

That’s some s#itty news.

[Siouxphan27]

3 hours ago, UNDlaw80 said:

To add to that....

Since this country still doesn't have adequate testing available for everybody, some researchers have been analyzing sewage a method of tracking Covid rates.  Some interesting initial findings: 

 

Sewage analysis suggests a New England metro area with fewer than 500 COVID-19 cases may have exponentially more

https://abcnews.go.com/US/sewage-analysis-suggests-england-metro-area-fewer-500/story?id=70068740

 

[Cratter]

3 hours ago, keikla said:

Sometimes it feels like there are two totally different viruses.

 

There may be two separate types of COVID-19 pneumonia that might require different interventions

 

[southpaw]

13 hours ago, MafiaMan said:

You know what else is shocking?  My severance package from Forum Communications.  

I'm sure that $1,200 stimulus check will tide you over. 

At least someone is out there "buying votes" by offering more than the basic unemployment benefit for those who lost their jobs. 

[Nodak78]

7 hours ago, dynato said:

It is worth noting that the governor's model, is actually a team of PhD. infectious diseases professors from the U of MN twin cities. One member of that team is Michael Osterholm.

Models become invalid after two days without continuous updates of the developing situation. Take the IHME model, which is where the 60k deaths is being pulled from. They estimate that peak NY deaths will happen on April 15th, and that they will have half the deaths of April 15th, just two days afterwards on April 17th. Their model assumes a sharp decrease in daily deaths after the peak has been reached. Their model assumes that there is not going to be a plateau at the peak and a slow trail-off reduction in deaths.  

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/new-york

The has changed already and confidence level in shaded area is huge.  Or lack of confidence is more like CYA.

[southpaw]

Despite the pandemic, some states are seeing fewer deaths from car accidents and crime: https://eu.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/04/11/michigan-death-down-in-march-despite-coronavirus/5120360002/

Michigan averages 8,500 deaths in March over the last 5 years. This year, they have just 6,000. 259 of those were Covid related.

[southpaw]

19 hours ago, UND1983 said:

Do you want this to get as bad as the models say it's going to and to drag out into the fall?  Interested in your angle.

No, I want Americans to start realizing significant changes to the entire system need to be made.

In 2009-10, 12,500 people died in the U.S. from H1N1. What did we learn from that? Clearly nothing, as that many people have died from Covid in the last week.

When there needs to be a swift response, many people were lazy to react and the models bore that out. Now that most states are on board, we are going to see those effects in a couple of weeks. The ones that acted quickly are already seeing their numbers flatten. 

The US system isn't designed to care for the average worker. MM loses his job, and that sucks, but what support does he have when that happens? The government shut things down, so the government should provide for those impacted.

We are all going to get a $1,200 check. Those who lost their jobs will get unemployment and an extra $600 per week. 

How can the often self-proclaimed "greatest country in the world" only manage to help Americans with a tiny sum of financial support? The small businesses that have had to lay off employees and may not survive this, are getting road blocks left and right. 

Corporations that spent millions using the 2008 bailouts to buy back their stock are getting bailed out again, because why? Do we really need to save another horribly run airline that overcharges customers yet gives executives multi-million dollar bonuses each year? 

There are thousands of people in Texas trying to get food, while farmers in Wisconsin are dumping out milk because they can't sell it. In what world does that make sense? Only in one where it's always "me first," whether that's an individual who won't bother to stay at home because of "freedom," or a company that lays off thousands of employees because you gotta keep those shareholders happy and you can't dare lose money for a quarter or two, to the politicians who would rather give handouts to the companies that donated to their campaigns than the people that actually do the voting, to the President who is more concerned about the Stock Market and the ratings of his daily pressers than saving the lives of Americans. 

[Siouxphan27]

12 minutes ago, southpaw said:

No, I want Americans to start realizing significant changes to the entire system need to be made.

In 2009-10, 12,500 people died in the U.S. from H1N1. What did we learn from that? Clearly nothing, as that many people have died from Covid in the last week.

When there needs to be a swift response, many people were lazy to react and the models bore that out. Now that most states are on board, we are going to see those effects in a couple of weeks. The ones that acted quickly are already seeing their numbers flatten. 

The US system isn't designed to care for the average worker. MM loses his job, and that sucks, but what support does he have when that happens? The government shut things down, so the government should provide for those impacted.

We are all going to get a $1,200 check. Those who lost their jobs will get unemployment and an extra $600 per week. 

How can the often self-proclaimed "greatest country in the world" only manage to help Americans with a tiny sum of financial support? The small businesses that have had to lay off employees and may not survive this, are getting road blocks left and right. 

Corporations that spent millions using the 2008 bailouts to buy back their stock are getting bailed out again, because why? Do we really need to save another horribly run airline that overcharges customers yet gives executives multi-million dollar bonuses each year? 

There are thousands of people in Texas trying to get food, while farmers in Wisconsin are dumping out milk because they can't sell it. In what world does that make sense? Only in one where it's always "me first," whether that's an individual who won't bother to stay at home because of "freedom," or a company that lays off thousands of employees because you gotta keep those shareholders happy and you can't dare lose money for a quarter or two, to the politicians who would rather give handouts to the companies that donated to their campaigns than the people that actually do the voting, to the President who is more concerned about the Stock Market and the ratings of his daily pressers than saving the lives of Americans. 

Why is it always the same people on the same side who despite the rules here, always choose to go political?   

I could say 83% of all corona deaths in the U.S. thus far have occurred in the 24 states with democrat governors, therefore, they must not care at all about their citizens. 

But I won’t, because despite that statistic being true, it’s an inaccurate characterization of the efforts and the situation.  

Happy Easter one and all!

[UND1983]

41 minutes ago, southpaw said:

No, I want Americans to start realizing significant changes to the entire system need to be made.

In 2009-10, 12,500 people died in the U.S. from H1N1. What did we learn from that? Clearly nothing, as that many people have died from Covid in the last week.

When there needs to be a swift response, many people were lazy to react and the models bore that out. Now that most states are on board, we are going to see those effects in a couple of weeks. The ones that acted quickly are already seeing their numbers flatten. 

The US system isn't designed to care for the average worker. MM loses his job, and that sucks, but what support does he have when that happens? The government shut things down, so the government should provide for those impacted.

We are all going to get a $1,200 check. Those who lost their jobs will get unemployment and an extra $600 per week. 

How can the often self-proclaimed "greatest country in the world" only manage to help Americans with a tiny sum of financial support? The small businesses that have had to lay off employees and may not survive this, are getting road blocks left and right. 

Corporations that spent millions using the 2008 bailouts to buy back their stock are getting bailed out again, because why? Do we really need to save another horribly run airline that overcharges customers yet gives executives multi-million dollar bonuses each year? 

There are thousands of people in Texas trying to get food, while farmers in Wisconsin are dumping out milk because they can't sell it. In what world does that make sense? Only in one where it's always "me first," whether that's an individual who won't bother to stay at home because of "freedom," or a company that lays off thousands of employees because you gotta keep those shareholders happy and you can't dare lose money for a quarter or two, to the politicians who would rather give handouts to the companies that donated to their campaigns than the people that actually do the voting, to the President who is more concerned about the Stock Market and the ratings of his daily pressers than saving the lives of Americans. 

Entitlements are the answer?  That will really get the economy up and running. 

You may want to double check who pushed through the $600 a week bonus for all unemployed workers.  

[southpaw]

11 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

Entitlements are the answer?  That will really get the economy up and running. 

You may want to double check who pushed through the $600 a week bonus for all unemployed workers.  

What you call entitlements, I call support for people who lost their job due to no fault of their own.

I know who pushed through the $600 and that's the point. Without them, there would have been nothing extra as evidence by those officials saying the extra should be taken away. It's still not enough but that's how compromise works these days.

[UND1983]

21 minutes ago, southpaw said:

What you call entitlements, I call support for people who lost their job due to no fault of their own.

I know who pushed through the $600 and that's the point. Without them, there would have been nothing extra as evidence by those officials saying the extra should be taken away. It's still not enough but that's how compromise works these days.

Why would anybody go back to work when they can get nearly as much or more than they were making before?  

[UND1983]

Are the hospitals around the country hurting as bad financially as I am reading?  That would bad to lose small rural hospitals that operate on razor thin margins.

[MafiaMan]

6 hours ago, southpaw said:

I'm sure that $1,200 stimulus check will tide you over. 

At least someone is out there "buying votes" by offering more than the basic unemployment benefit for those who lost their jobs. 

I’m confused, southpaw.  On one hand, you want me to stay at home for like the next decade to help “flatten the curve” and on the other hand, you are mocking a $1,200 payment from the federal government for doing exactly what I’m told. 

[Oxbow6]

6 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

Are the hospitals around the country hurting as bad financially as I am reading?  That would bad to lose small rural hospitals that operate on razor thin margins.

Worse

[southpaw]

16 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

Why would anybody go back to work when they can get nearly as much or more than they were making before?  

It's very telling that your first reaction is to claim people are going to abuse the system. The true American way... me first. 

You know there are requirements to collect unemployment? Those wouldn't disappear. Just as the $600 a week isn't forever, neither world additional monetary support. 

I can imagine this scenario playing out "I'm sorry sir, you'll have to accept just a fraction of your salary, despite losing your job through no fault of your own. But there's someone who normally makes $13 an hour and under this system, they'd actually make $14. So instead, we will screw everyone else. "

Remember, the boogeyman is just a story, not everyday life. 

[southpaw]

4 minutes ago, MafiaMan said:

I’m confused, southpaw.  On one hand, you want me to stay at home for like the next decade to help “flatten the curve” and on the other hand, you are mocking a $1,200 payment from the federal government for doing exactly what I’m told. 

The next decade? That's cute. Stop acting like a couple months is forever. 

I'm mocking the $1,200 because it's a one time payment that doesn't even cover rent or mortgage for a lot of people. It should be more and it should be regular until stores and restaurants are open again. 

[MafiaMan]

15 minutes ago, southpaw said:

The next decade? That's cute. Stop acting like a couple months is forever. 

I'm mocking the $1,200 because it's a one time payment that doesn't even cover rent or mortgage for a lot of people. It should be more and it should be regular until stores and restaurants are open again. 

So the government should just print a bunch of dollar bills and pass them out like Easter candy?  Why didn’t we think of that sooner? 

[southpaw]

6 minutes ago, MafiaMan said:

So the government should just print a bunch of dollar bills and pass them out like Easter candy?  Why didn’t we think of that sooner? 

Fortunately, there are plenty of other ways to provide for people in a time like this and none of them involve billion dollar payouts to companies that have shown they don't care about their employees. 

It's incredible how predictable the responses from the Fox news watching contingent are. 

[UND1983]

5 minutes ago, southpaw said:

Fortunately, there are plenty of other ways to provide for people in a time like this and none of them involve billion dollar payouts to companies that have shown they don't care about their employees. 

It's incredible how predictable the responses from the Fox news watching contingent are. 

Without those billion dollar companies that, yes, are run poorly apparently - where do people work?   

[southpaw]

1 minute ago, UND1983 said:

Without those billion dollar companies that, yes, are run poorly apparently - where do people work?   

Why are there only two options? Why do we just accept horribly run companies as necessary? Why do we need to bail out airline companies a decade after doing it last time? Because they took advantage of the help offered. It was "me first" to them and their shareholders.

The cruise companies that flag their ships outside of the US to avoid paying US taxes don't deserve a bailout to keep them afloat.