Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Economic implications of a SARS/Coronavirus outbreak

Jump to new
upload_2020-7-4_8-53-9.png
The Victorian wave can be seen. Lets hope it is thwarted early, but I suspect it wont be. Made more difficult as they can watch the rest of Australia returning to 'normal' activities. The streets are going to get ugly as businesses and workers from selected suburbs are targeted for lockdown. Its divisive.
This is going to cause a lot of frustration from one suburb to the next. It is a community problem and I think it has to be an all in approach. I cannot see how little 'embers' are picked up till the postal district becomes a hot spot.
Going to be like catching frogs on lilypads.

Good Luck I truly hope you win this early.
 
Oh yeah, vic's boned. All the protesters spread it like wildfire. The whole state's going to be in quarantine while the rest of the country returns to normal/travels between each other.

My sympathy is pretty limited considering how self-inflicted it is. I just feel sorry for the people that did the right thing and stayed home etc.
 
I saw a great meme yesterday that said:

"The people who have stayed home, only gone out when they've absolutely had to, always worn masks whenever they've had to go somewhere etc etc are the ones who did the entire uni groupwork assignments on their own".

Hilarious, but so depressingly true too.
 
over9k said:
Oh yeah, vic's boned. All the protesters spread it like wildfire. The whole state's going to be in quarantine while the rest of the country returns to normal/travels between each other.

My sympathy is pretty limited considering how self-inflicted it is. I just feel sorry for the people that did the right thing and stayed home etc.
Click to expand...
No, not true. That's just the meme.

We had it under control but in two hotels where we had travellers coming in the security guards rooted the girls they were meant to guard and then spread it at Ramadan celebration to their community. Just pathetic.

NSW had the army doing the guarding and no problem.
 
jbocker said:
View attachment 105557
The Victorian wave can be seen. Lets hope it is thwarted early, but I suspect it wont be. Made more difficult as they can watch the rest of Australia returning to 'normal' activities. The streets are going to get ugly as businesses and workers from selected suburbs are targeted for lockdown. Its divisive.
This is going to cause a lot of frustration from one suburb to the next. It is a community problem and I think it has to be an all in approach. I cannot see how little 'embers' are picked up till the postal district becomes a hot spot.
Going to be like catching frogs on lilypads.

Good Luck I truly hope you win this early.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. We seemed to be trapped in an alternation between opening up the economy and closing it down when an outbreak occurs.
 
The world clearly doesn't have this virus under control; our international and domestic borders need to remain closed for the foreseeable future. I think we can aim to go back to business as usual only within our own domestic states, with the borders remaining closed:

upload_2020-7-5_14-1-54.png
 
Chronos-Plutus said:
According to S&P base case: credit cost maintenance for Chinese Banks are estimated to be ~RMB 1.6 Trillion due to an expected surge in nonperforming assets of ~38.9%.

View attachment 105596

Full article here: https://www.spglobal.com/ratings/en...could-rise-by-us-224-billion-in-2020-11428188
Click to expand...

That's a comically optimistic chart if I ever saw one! I particularly like the 2.3% chance of increased military conflicts (hahaha!) and a less than 50% chance of reduction in travel and international trade, meaning they think the consensus view among senior risk analysts is that international travel and trade will *PROBABLY NOT* be reduced in 18 months! Haha! Almost all figures are less than 50%, most less than 25%, while in reality a lot of the realistic actual figures are pretty much 100% and certainly over 50%.
 
Chronos-Plutus said:
The world clearly doesn't have this virus under control; our international and domestic borders need to remain closed for the foreseeable future. I think we can aim to go back to business as usual only within our own domestic states, with the borders remaining closed:
Click to expand...

Take a moment to have a good think about this statement.

Yes, this virus is out of control. That was obvious in February, arguably January. I was puzzled at people still asking the question in March as though it was a valid question. Now in July we can presumably all agree on this much...

So, what does keeping borders closed achieve? The virus is already out of control. We agree on this. This means it is already out of control. The time to try to control it has already passed. What does shutting down borders now achieve? Hint: If something is already everywhere, keeping it out has become impossible, and letting a tiny amount slip from one place where it exists to another place where it already exists isn't particularly tragic.

People have not only a lack of ability to think critically without emotional bias, but very short memories. It was literally only a month or two ago when the mantra was 'flatten the curve'. I don't think it has been long enough for people not to recognise that term, but you'll notice it's not being used now. Think about why. It makes absolutely no sense now! The idea was that inevitably the virus would spread through everyone, we couldn't stop it, but we could flatten the curve so that at the peak there would be as little drain on the health system as possible, and then we'd have heard immunity and life would go on (to be clear, this was the official goal, not my own agenda or anything). It turned out that the virus is so mild that it was almost eliminated. The curve is so flat that it literally won't ever come to an end. We had a peak of around 5,000 known cases in Australia, which then reduced to around 350. Then we had mass protest gatherings etc and a surge in numbers up to around 900 (keep in mind that most people have symptoms so mild they don't even know they have anything) and of course we blame family gatherings, but the point is, even with this going on, we have a curve so low that it literally can't ever play out. In a hundred years we could still maintain the virus at a low level within the community, if it was economically possible to live this way indefinitely. So, what's the end goal? When we had the virus down to a few hundred known cases, we decided to relax restrictions, then when numbers increase we increase restrictions again? Do you want to do this forever and have an indefinitely crippled country? The inevitable result will obviously be that the country gets weakened until it is taken over/bought out by stronger countries.

Look at the worst hit countries, their average age of virus deaths is around the same age as their countries' average life expectancies. Look at Australia, it's the same pattern, just in lower numbers. What are we achieving? Severely harming the country to either delay the inevitable or destroying the country to achieve nothing?

What is your end game? Depending on your view of the virus, lockdowns either delay the inevitable at extreme cost, or achieve nothing at extreme cost. How do you propose this situation is going to resolve?
 
Sdajii said:
Take a moment to have a good think about this statement.

Yes, this virus is out of control. That was obvious in February, arguably January. I was puzzled at people still asking the question in March as though it was a valid question. Now in July we can presumably all agree on this much...

So, what does keeping borders closed achieve? The virus is already out of control. We agree on this. This means it is already out of control. The time to try to control it has already passed. What does shutting down borders now achieve? Hint: If something is already everywhere, keeping it out has become impossible, and letting a tiny amount slip from one place where it exists to another place where it already exists isn't particularly tragic.

People have not only a lack of ability to think critically without emotional bias, but very short memories. It was literally only a month or two ago when the mantra was 'flatten the curve'. I don't think it has been long enough for people not to recognise that term, but you'll notice it's not being used now. Think about why. It makes absolutely no sense now! The idea was that inevitably the virus would spread through everyone, we couldn't stop it, but we could flatten the curve so that at the peak there would be as little drain on the health system as possible, and then we'd have heard immunity and life would go on (to be clear, this was the official goal, not my own agenda or anything). It turned out that the virus is so mild that it was almost eliminated. The curve is so flat that it literally won't ever come to an end. We had a peak of around 5,000 known cases in Australia, which then reduced to around 350. Then we had mass protest gatherings etc and a surge in numbers up to around 900 (keep in mind that most people have symptoms so mild they don't even know they have anything) and of course we blame family gatherings, but the point is, even with this going on, we have a curve so low that it literally can't ever play out. In a hundred years we could still maintain the virus at a low level within the community, if it was economically possible to live this way indefinitely. So, what's the end goal? When we had the virus down to a few hundred known cases, we decided to relax restrictions, then when numbers increase we increase restrictions again? Do you want to do this forever and have an indefinitely crippled country? The inevitable result will obviously be that the country gets weakened until it is taken over/bought out by stronger countries.

Look at the worst hit countries, their average age of virus deaths is around the same age as their countries' average life expectancies. Look at Australia, it's the same pattern, just in lower numbers. What are we achieving? Severely harming the country to either delay the inevitable or destroying the country to achieve nothing?

What is your end game? Depending on your view of the virus, lockdowns either delay the inevitable at extreme cost, or achieve nothing at extreme cost. How do you propose this situation is going to resolve?
Click to expand...
You are playing to my ears..indeed..what now? Do we want to become the Hamish country of the world, the new north Korea?

You will see then any sensible discussion is impossible, too emotive by people brainwashed by endless reporting on how bad the Us are or Victoria.there is no sensible figure based talk, just scare tactics right and left so my conviction this is used as part of an agenda.
Thinking about it, as Sweden the far left darling is the only western country with a different reaction, we must all be in a far right take over evil plan...
Just teasing....
 
Sdajii said:
That's a comically optimistic chart if I ever saw one! I particularly like the 2.3% chance of increased military conflicts (hahaha!) and a less than 50% chance of reduction in travel and international trade, meaning they think the consensus view among senior risk analysts is that international travel and trade will *PROBABLY NOT* be reduced in 18 months! Haha! Almost all figures are less than 50%, most less than 25%, while in reality a lot of the realistic actual figures are pretty much 100% and certainly over 50%.
Click to expand...

I think you responded to the wrong post/image buddy. Anyway; if you have a problem, it is with the expert risk analysts, not me.
 
Sdajii said:
Take a moment to have a good think about this statement.

Yes, this virus is out of control. That was obvious in February, arguably January. I was puzzled at people still asking the question in March as though it was a valid question. Now in July we can presumably all agree on this much...

So, what does keeping borders closed achieve? The virus is already out of control. We agree on this. This means it is already out of control. The time to try to control it has already passed. What does shutting down borders now achieve? Hint: If something is already everywhere, keeping it out has become impossible, and letting a tiny amount slip from one place where it exists to another place where it already exists isn't particularly tragic.

People have not only a lack of ability to think critically without emotional bias, but very short memories. It was literally only a month or two ago when the mantra was 'flatten the curve'. I don't think it has been long enough for people not to recognise that term, but you'll notice it's not being used now. Think about why. It makes absolutely no sense now! The idea was that inevitably the virus would spread through everyone, we couldn't stop it, but we could flatten the curve so that at the peak there would be as little drain on the health system as possible, and then we'd have heard immunity and life would go on (to be clear, this was the official goal, not my own agenda or anything). It turned out that the virus is so mild that it was almost eliminated. The curve is so flat that it literally won't ever come to an end. We had a peak of around 5,000 known cases in Australia, which then reduced to around 350. Then we had mass protest gatherings etc and a surge in numbers up to around 900 (keep in mind that most people have symptoms so mild they don't even know they have anything) and of course we blame family gatherings, but the point is, even with this going on, we have a curve so low that it literally can't ever play out. In a hundred years we could still maintain the virus at a low level within the community, if it was economically possible to live this way indefinitely. So, what's the end goal? When we had the virus down to a few hundred known cases, we decided to relax restrictions, then when numbers increase we increase restrictions again? Do you want to do this forever and have an indefinitely crippled country? The inevitable result will obviously be that the country gets weakened until it is taken over/bought out by stronger countries.

Look at the worst hit countries, their average age of virus deaths is around the same age as their countries' average life expectancies. Look at Australia, it's the same pattern, just in lower numbers. What are we achieving? Severely harming the country to either delay the inevitable or destroying the country to achieve nothing?

What is your end game? Depending on your view of the virus, lockdowns either delay the inevitable at extreme cost, or achieve nothing at extreme cost. How do you propose this situation is going to resolve?
Click to expand...

The virus isn't out of control in NSW!

Point being that we must keep our domestic border closed so that we can get back to business and open up our restaurants, pubs, cinemas, and so on. Or we can just open up the border, and let the virus run out of control, that will risk overwhelming our hospital system, and force us back into full lockdown again which will cause more economic pain.
 
over9k said:
The virus is well within control in plenty of places. Not many, but some.
Click to expand...

That is correct. I posted the chart to highlight the vulnerability of our domestic states and to remind us that we need to keep our borders closed at all costs to ensure that our domestic state economies have the best chance to get back to business as usual under these global conditions.

Instead I get a provocative and disingenuous response that could have been written in a little paragraph rather than an incoherent long rant.

I am happy to engage in intelligent discourse and we don't have to agree on everything; but please spare me the provocations and trolling. If that person does it again, they can go my ignore list as I don't wish to waste my time.
 
Yeah this whole "the virus can't be controlled and lockdowns are therefore futile and it's also harmless therefore lockdowns are also pointless" narrative absolutely boggles my mind.

It absolutely can be controlled and it's absolutely harmful/fatal increasing exponentially with age.
 
over9k said:
Yeah this whole "the virus can't be controlled and lockdowns are therefore futile and it's also harmless therefore lockdowns are also pointless" narrative absolutely boggles my mind.

It absolutely can be controlled and it's absolutely harmful/fatal increasing exponentially with age.
Click to expand...

I agree that it is a real threat. We in Australia have put in a huge sacrifice, at an enormous economic cost, to just throw it all away now. I want our states to get back to business with all our restaurants, pubs, clubs, grocery stores, and so on; operating without any COVID restrictions while we keep our domestic and international borders closed. I see that keeping our domestic borders closed is a measure of redundancy that builds greater resilience in keeping this virus under control; thus ensuring that we don't go back into lockdowns again, like in Victoria.

Once all the states have had a few months with minimal new COVID cases, while economically operating without any COVID restrictions; then we should drop the domestic border closures. Forget about opening up our country internationally; even for Hong Kong students and citizens, Hong Kong isn't our problem.
 
Sdajii said:
What is your end game? Depending on your view of the virus, lockdowns either delay the inevitable at extreme cost, or achieve nothing at extreme cost. How do you propose this situation is going to resolve?
Click to expand...
Great question.

Would love to know what our PM and premiers answer would be?

Something along the lines of IHN F..king Idea.

Let it ripe, you cannot defeat it, nor isolate it. This is the biggest joke is mismanagement of a crisis, well a claytons crisis, a crisis that is not really a crisis.
 
Last edited:
The upcoming reporting season, should give a better indication of the economic fallout and which sectors have been affected the most.
Some States will have a lot more fallout than others IMO, especially the areas highly dependent on tourism, but will that be localised?
The banks will probably have to provision more for bad and doubtfull debts, super may take a hit on reduced dividends, withdrawls and writedowns, also I wonder how long online travel related companies can carry a business model that can't supply a service.
In reality the lack of overseas tourism coming into Australia may not have a massive effect, as it isn't a huge money generator, as opposed to the extra money Australians will be spending due to not being able to travel overseas.
Just my opinion, but the reporting season will show whether the Government cash splash has worked.
All the above just my personal thoughts, certainly is uncharted waters.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

DB008
  • Poll
Coronavirus (COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2) outbreak discussion
311 312 313
Replies
6K
Views
362K
DB008
DB008
wayneL
The economic implications of a Harris presidency
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
7K
wayneL
wayneL
MovingAverage
Post Corona...
7 8 9
Replies
160
Views
15K
Smurf1976
Smurf1976
greggles
Companies that are doomed due to the coronavirus outbreak
Replies
14
Views
3K
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
greggles
Shorting stocks/sectors affected by the coronavirus
Replies
6
Views
919
basilio
basilio
Top