Economic implications of a SARS/Coronavirus outbreak

[rederob]

@rederob and @wayneL, Can't this go over to the 'general chat' virus thread, it is supposed to be about the economic implications.

The economic implications are a factor of the death rate and rates of infection. The reason Australian States are acting as they are is due to what we have seen from actual overseas experience. I'm not sure you would be happy to be in a situation where you had better than one chance in ten of dying rather than where we stand at a fraction of that.
Public confidence is essential to economic recovery. Queensland's internally-driven economy is currently rebounding strongly because people are confident to be out and about, and from Friday we let in cornstalks, croweaters, sandgropers and sundry others while locking out gumeaters. We hope they stick around to watch the AFL grand final at the Gabba!

Redrob, do you have any rough figures/studies of the amount of people who where asymptomatic and were never tested, maybe a ratio of those tested vs those not tested but may have shown positive if tested.

While the death rate globally sites at 4.7% of those tested, I wonder if this is even close to the real figure.
I suggest that possible 4:1 showed where asymptomatic vs confirmed.
This alters the stats by a very large margin if it is the case.

The best proxy is from Wuhan's recent testing of about 10 million to reveal 300 cases.
What we actually need is a large scale antibody testing effort somewhere, as it's possible many thousands in Wuhan actually went through their epidemic without getting sick so will never appear in any statistical record.

 

[over9k]

There's no standardised testing and no honesty/reliable data anyway. We simply can't know any of this with any kind of certainty.

We need only discuss government and man-on-the-street response(s).

 

[sptrawler]

Yep, no chance of a sensible outcome, on either front.
Some can draw the longest bow known to man and still look in a mirror, it would be great if we could define some actual share positions, from the general ramblings and posturing over statistics.
There is a thread, on the general chat forum, that covers current actions and statistics of the virus, why bog this down as well.
It isn't a pi$$ing competition, this thread is I thought to give suggestions as to economic and market positions.
Maybe time to find somewhere else.

 

[over9k]

Well we have data from sectors that have reopened with vs without virus - AU's seen a spike in business almost everywhere whereas USA mostly has not. Foot traffic has not returned to shopping centres, people are actively choosing (or being ordered by their employer) to continue working from home etc etc.

There IS now a (relatively) medically sensible response from the general public, finally. I made a big post in one of the other threads that i'll repost here in a moment.

 

[rederob]

There's no standardised testing and no honesty/reliable data anyway. We simply can't know any of this with any kind of certainty.

We need only discuss government and man-on-the-street response(s).

Swab tests are pretty much the same across the globe.
Serology tests are a different matter.
We can be pretty sure that if Victoria has more than 100 positive swab tests every day of the week, and it's mostly community spread, then we have a major problem for that State's government.
The man on the street response in non-Victorian States is to keep them out, and other State governments are falling in line with that sentiment. I feel very sorry for the many millions in Victoria who for months have done the right thing, only now to learn that a few ignorant/selfish assses have landed them in a mess.

 

[Chronos-Plutus]

NSW and the ACT are already clearly compromised as we have had many weeks of people crossing the border from VIC unrestricted.

WA, NT, QLD, TAS and SA shouldn't be opening their borders with NSW and the ACT either, at least for a couple of months to see how many VIC based infections have crossed the border into NSW and the ACT.

 

[over9k]

Ok here's my post from another thread, it was a bit of a rageresponse so don't take the prickly nature of it to heart:





Let's go back to before coronavirus for a moment.

Before coronavirus hit, there was already a long and consistent trend of business and work moving away from face to face/bricks and mortar and to distance/online based on purely economic reasons. The ability to order items direct from the manufacturer online, the ability for even a middle-man to sell items from a massive warehouse with rent a tenth of the price per square foot and massive economies of scale to boot, the ability for a business to reduce its necessary office space and therefore rent and fitout costs by 20% if its employees were to stay home/work from home just one day a week (let alone all of them), the ability to talk to someone halfway across the world in seconds virtually for free on a zoom call vs having to fly what could be teams of people for a day straight, pay for all their flights, food, accommodation, lost work, time away from home and so on and so forth were all major competitive advantages and resulted in half the bloody economy undergoing a structural readjustment based on nothing other than economic/cost reduction grounds.

This is the very trend I have been talking about ad nausea since my first comments in this thread.

What coronavirus has done is put that trend on steroids. We haven't seen 5% more people working/ordering stuff from home in the last 6 months, we've seen 10x it. Or whatever. Exact numbers don't really matter - it's a massive increase and that's all we need to worry about.

So from there, we ask ourselves, why? The answer is twofold, but both answers share the same source. Firstly, there's the lockdowns. Government imposed lockdowns literally required that many people work and buy from home. Secondly, human behaviour. Many both workers and businesses have voluntarily decided to keep everyone working from home because A: people themselves don't want to get the virus and B: getting the virus stops you from working. Even if you didn't actually care about your employees, keeping them uninfected makes sense from a purely business point of view. What is key with these two realities is understanding that even if all government imposed lockdowns were lifted, employees and businesses are VOLUNTARILY avoiding human contact. This means that government imposed lockdowns or not, the end result is still very similiar: Avoidance of human contact, i.e working & ordering from home if at all possible.

And you can prove this to yourself quite easily - if it was only about the lockdowns, why hasn't stay-at-home tech fallen off a cliff once the lockdowns have been lifted? Why hasn't everything else taken off like a gunshot? Why haven't we seen an inversion of what we saw previously?

There is a reason why what I have dubbed "stay at home tech" has outperformed all the major indices massively. There is a reason why basically all markets except stay-at-home-tech have tanked every single time bad virus headlines/data has hit the news and stay-at-home-tech has often actually increased on those days and that reason is that it is the VIRUS which is dictating human & business behaviour and therefore markets.

But the deeper point that people like duc are failing to recognise is that the coronavirus has not diverted a previous trend or created a new one - it has simply accelerated something which was ALREADY OCCURRING ORGANICALLY.

There is a reason why all the airline execs are saying that business travel will never return to previous levels. There is a reason why the airbnb ceo is saying his business will never return to previous levels. There is a reason why so many companies are mothballing entire floors of offices or buildings. There is a reason why office rents are down 25% and outright purchase prices are down 40%. There is a reason why jets are being retired and scrapped en masse. There is a reason why chief exec's of office furniture companies are saying their business will never return and they're attempting to pivot to home office fitouts. There is a reason why sales on ebay & amazon are absolutely stratospheric even when their bricks & mortar competitors have been allowed to reopen, and the reason is exactly the same for all of these things:

THIS WAS ALL GOING TO HAPPEN ANYWAY.

This is NOT a divergence from a previous trend, this IS the previous trend. It's just been put into overdrive and 5 years of change has occurred in about 5 months.

This is not to say that this is going to continue in perpetuity. I have never claimed that things will. Once the virus, and therefore the reason for the ACCELERATION of this phenomenon is gone, plenty of people will return to the office and plenty of money will go back to consumables like food rather than tv streaming services or what have you. But as long as the virus remains, so will this acceleration of this ALREADY OCCURRING trend.

But once a vaccine is found, things are NOT going to return to their pre-virus levels because those levels WERE GOING TO CHANGE ANYWAY.

I'll bet you any sum of money you like, absolutely anything, that zoom, amazon, ebay et al will NOT return to their pre-virus levels. Any sum you like.

Anyone who thinks that this is some kind of aberration and/or will simply be reversed once a vaccine is found, or that a single day of bounce in the rest of the market in response to, say, better-than-expected employment data disproves my assertion, is utterly, utterly clueless.

Consumer discretionary, flat for a month:


Consumer staples, flat for almost three months, down 6% in the last month:


Energy, flat for 2.5 months and down 15% over the past month:


Healthcare, flat for almost 3 months:


Industrials, done SFA since the end of april and down 10% over the last month:


Materials, flat for just over a month:


Utilities, flat for three months and down 10% over the last month:


Real estate, flat for three months and down 7% in the last month:


Even communications is flat for the last month after its run up until start of june:


Meanwhile, tech has done almost nothing but climb since the march slump and is up over 50% in that time, 20% in the last three months, with 8% of it being just in the last month:


And my "stay at home tech" like zoom:


Ebay:


Amazon:


Are up 100-150% since their march lows and 20% over just the last month.


I said a month ago when I joined that the U.S would see a 2nd wave/2nd slump. Since then, consumer discretionary is flat, consumer staples is down 5%, energy is down 15%, healthcare is flat, industrials is down 10%, materials is flat, utilities is down 12%, real estate is down 7%, and communications is flat.

Meanwhile, tech is up 3% and my stay-at-home tech is up 20%.

And wouldn't you know it, it was basically bang on a month ago that the run we saw (in some sectors) up until the 8th of june reversed at the exact same time that the virus cases started spiking:



So are you still going to sit here & claim I'm wrong and that this is all just one giant coincidence? That the virus data has nothing to do with anything when *nothing* except tech has gained since the reopenings, and most of the indices have actually fallen? All of which flipped trajectory at the exact same moment (like, to the day) that the virus case trajectory also flipped?

You still want to sit here & claim it's all a giant coincidence and that there's no trend here?



I followed this post up with my personal holdings:


It's not gambling frog, I've been a bit more sophisticated than just eyeballing them. I do not hold apple, facebook, google, or slack for example.

Here's everything:



Iirc I've had one red day in the last month. One. Even today was green whilst the djia dropped 1.5%.

I've been more than open about what I hold/buy & why - if people want to ignore me then that's fine, but as far as I know, my returns have been miles above everyone else's.


It is not a coincidence that this all flipped trajectory at the exact same moment the virus case numbers did. I've been calling a 2nd slump/2nd wave since I joined this forum and have received little more than dismissal and ridicule for it. Yet, every other sector is between flat and down 15% over the last month vs my portfolio being up 20% and I have no intention to sell as I firmly believe that it is the virus which is dictating ALL of this (and I've explained why) and the virus is not going away.

 

[rederob]

Yep, no chance of a sensible outcome, on either front.
Some can draw the longest bow known to man and still look in a mirror, it would be great if we could define some actual share positions, from the general ramblings and posturing over statistics.
There is a thread, on the general chat forum, that covers current actions and statistics of the virus, why bog this down as well.
It isn't a pi$$ing competition, this thread is I thought to give suggestions as to economic and market positions.
Maybe time to find somewhere else.

Most ASX companies have made announcements relating to COV19 impacts so is there a point repeating them here? Are they not better in detail in company specific threads?
Take Ardent Leisure as an example. It will get a big lift from QLD theme parks this half, but also has US exposure through its Main Event division.
We might know an impact in part of a company's business, but unless we can tie it all together it's otherwise meaningless.

 

[Joe Blow]

Just a reminder to all that we have two active COVID-19 threads. This one is for discussion of the economic impacts of the virus, while the other thread is a more general discussion that is more about the virus itself than the economic impact of it.

Please keep this thread focused on the economic impact (past, present and future) of COVID-19 and take the more general discussion to the other thread.

Thank you.

 

[sptrawler]

Most ASX companies have made announcements relating to COV19 impacts so is there a point repeating them here? Are they not better in detail in company specific threads?
Take Ardent Leisure as an example. It will get a big lift from QLD theme parks this half, but also has US exposure through its Main Event division.
We might know an impact in part of a company's business, but unless we can tie it all together it's otherwise meaningless.

Yep you win Rob, time for me to move on.

 

[Chronos-Plutus]

Ok here's my post from another thread, it was a bit of a rageresponse so don't take the prickly nature of it to heart:





Let's go back to before coronavirus for a moment.

Before coronavirus hit, there was already a long and consistent trend of business and work moving away from face to face/bricks and mortar and to distance/online based on purely economic reasons. The ability to order items direct from the manufacturer online, the ability for even a middle-man to sell items from a massive warehouse with rent a tenth of the price per square foot and massive economies of scale to boot, the ability for a business to reduce its necessary office space and therefore rent and fitout costs by 20% if its employees were to stay home/work from home just one day a week (let alone all of them), the ability to talk to someone halfway across the world in seconds virtually for free on a zoom call vs having to fly what could be teams of people for a day straight, pay for all their flights, food, accommodation, lost work, time away from home and so on and so forth were all major competitive advantages and resulted in half the bloody economy undergoing a structural readjustment based on nothing other than economic/cost reduction grounds.

This is the very trend I have been talking about ad nausea since my first comments in this thread.

What coronavirus has done is put that trend on steroids. We haven't seen 5% more people working/ordering stuff from home in the last 6 months, we've seen 10x it. Or whatever. Exact numbers don't really matter - it's a massive increase and that's all we need to worry about.

So from there, we ask ourselves, why? The answer is twofold, but both answers share the same source. Firstly, there's the lockdowns. Government imposed lockdowns literally required that many people work and buy from home. Secondly, human behaviour. Many both workers and businesses have voluntarily decided to keep everyone working from home because A: people themselves don't want to get the virus and B: getting the virus stops you from working. Even if you didn't actually care about your employees, keeping them uninfected makes sense from a purely business point of view. What is key with these two realities is understanding that even if all government imposed lockdowns were lifted, employees and businesses are VOLUNTARILY avoiding human contact. This means that government imposed lockdowns or not, the end result is still very similiar: Avoidance of human contact, i.e working & ordering from home if at all possible.

And you can prove this to yourself quite easily - if it was only about the lockdowns, why hasn't stay-at-home tech fallen off a cliff once the lockdowns have been lifted? Why hasn't everything else taken off like a gunshot? Why haven't we seen an inversion of what we saw previously?

There is a reason why what I have dubbed "stay at home tech" has outperformed all the major indices massively. There is a reason why basically all markets except stay-at-home-tech have tanked every single time bad virus headlines/data has hit the news and stay-at-home-tech has often actually increased on those days and that reason is that it is the VIRUS which is dictating human & business behaviour and therefore markets.

But the deeper point that people like duc are failing to recognise is that the coronavirus has not diverted a previous trend or created a new one - it has simply accelerated something which was ALREADY OCCURRING ORGANICALLY.

There is a reason why all the airline execs are saying that business travel will never return to previous levels. There is a reason why the airbnb ceo is saying his business will never return to previous levels. There is a reason why so many companies are mothballing entire floors of offices or buildings. There is a reason why office rents are down 25% and outright purchase prices are down 40%. There is a reason why jets are being retired and scrapped en masse. There is a reason why chief exec's of office furniture companies are saying their business will never return and they're attempting to pivot to home office fitouts. There is a reason why sales on ebay & amazon are absolutely stratospheric even when their bricks & mortar competitors have been allowed to reopen, and the reason is exactly the same for all of these things:

THIS WAS ALL GOING TO HAPPEN ANYWAY.

This is NOT a divergence from a previous trend, this IS the previous trend. It's just been put into overdrive and 5 years of change has occurred in about 5 months.

This is not to say that this is going to continue in perpetuity. I have never claimed that things will. Once the virus, and therefore the reason for the ACCELERATION of this phenomenon is gone, plenty of people will return to the office and plenty of money will go back to consumables like food rather than tv streaming services or what have you. But as long as the virus remains, so will this acceleration of this ALREADY OCCURRING trend.

But once a vaccine is found, things are NOT going to return to their pre-virus levels because those levels WERE GOING TO CHANGE ANYWAY.

I'll bet you any sum of money you like, absolutely anything, that zoom, amazon, ebay et al will NOT return to their pre-virus levels. Any sum you like.

Anyone who thinks that this is some kind of aberration and/or will simply be reversed once a vaccine is found, or that a single day of bounce in the rest of the market in response to, say, better-than-expected employment data disproves my assertion, is utterly, utterly clueless.

Consumer discretionary, flat for a month:


Consumer staples, flat for almost three months, down 6% in the last month:


Energy, flat for 2.5 months and down 15% over the past month:


Healthcare, flat for almost 3 months:


Industrials, done SFA since the end of april and down 10% over the last month:


Materials, flat for just over a month:


Utilities, flat for three months and down 10% over the last month:


Real estate, flat for three months and down 7% in the last month:


Even communications is flat for the last month after its run up until start of june:


Meanwhile, tech has done almost nothing but climb since the march slump and is up over 50% in that time, 20% in the last three months, with 8% of it being just in the last month:


And my "stay at home tech" like zoom:


Ebay:


Amazon:


Are up 100-150% since their march lows and 20% over just the last month.


I said a month ago when I joined that the U.S would see a 2nd wave/2nd slump. Since then, consumer discretionary is flat, consumer staples is down 5%, energy is down 15%, healthcare is flat, industrials is down 10%, materials is flat, utilities is down 12%, real estate is down 7%, and communications is flat.

Meanwhile, tech is up 3% and my stay-at-home tech is up 20%.

And wouldn't you know it, it was basically bang on a month ago that the run we saw (in some sectors) up until the 8th of june reversed at the exact same time that the virus cases started spiking:



So are you still going to sit here & claim I'm wrong and that this is all just one giant coincidence? That the virus data has nothing to do with anything when *nothing* except tech has gained since the reopenings, and most of the indices have actually fallen? All of which flipped trajectory at the exact same moment (like, to the day) that the virus case trajectory also flipped?

You still want to sit here & claim it's all a giant coincidence and that there's no trend here?



I followed this post up with my personal holdings:


It's not gambling frog, I've been a bit more sophisticated than just eyeballing them. I do not hold apple, facebook, google, or slack for example.

Here's everything:



Iirc I've had one red day in the last month. One. Even today was green whilst the djia dropped 1.5%.

I've been more than open about what I hold/buy & why - if people want to ignore me then that's fine, but as far as I know, my returns have been miles above everyone else's.


It is not a coincidence that this all flipped trajectory at the exact same moment the virus case numbers did. I've been calling a 2nd slump/2nd wave since I joined this forum and have received little more than dismissal and ridicule for it. Yet, every other sector is between flat and down 15% over the last month vs my portfolio being up 20% and I have no intention to sell as I firmly believe that it is the virus which is dictating ALL of this (and I've explained why) and the virus is not going away.

There is a great possibility that NSW and in particular Sydney, will get hit with a second wave now due to VIC; which means that we might have to go back into lockdown again also; causing more economic destruction.

VIC, NSW and the ACT need to be isolated from the rest of the nation ASAP. If NSW and the ACT have it under control in a month or two, then we can join the rest of the nation. VIC should be isolated till the end of the year at least, if we are serious about protecting the rest of the Australian economy.

 

[sptrawler]

Most ASX companies have made announcements relating to COV19 impacts so is there a point repeating them here? Are they not better in detail in company specific threads?
Take Ardent Leisure as an example. It will get a big lift from QLD theme parks this half, but also has US exposure through its Main Event division.
We might know an impact in part of a company's business, but unless we can tie it all together it's otherwise meaningless.

Thanks for that Rob, good point, I hadn't even thought about that being from W.A.

 

[Klogg]

Or how much was spent on the GFC and why were businesses which received assistance not required to publicly acknowledge this support and repay it in full with commercial rates of interest? That alone would fund plenty of medical care and improve lives.

Governments/Reserve Banks bailed our their deposit taking institutions, and any linked to taking them down. Had they not taken these steps, deposits would have been wiped out. It would have been a repeat of the 1930s great depression.

Make no mistake, this was money well spent (not to mention the US government ultimately made money on their bailouts)

Perspective gets lost.
Due to some form of control.

Un restrained around 7% of the population would die
before a vaccination is found that's around 490 million.

If you dont think that would impact life it self let alone
The Markets then your dreaming. Panic--you've seen
nothing yet!!

Everyone knows better---yet now one knows!

Carry on ---Covid 19 will!

7% is wrong. At most, it's 4%. It's likely much lower, especially if you consider the asymptomatic cases we're missing.

Test for antibodies show Connecticut has 6 times the number of people with antibodies as there are positive cases:
https://hartfordhealthcare.org/about-us/news-press/news-detail?articleid=26868&publicId=395

Does this mean the death rate is 1/6th the rate?

The death rate is likely much lower than we're seeing.

 

[over9k]

We're never going to know guys, there's no standardised testing, no reliability of whatever has been reported (anyone who believes anything the chinese government says is a moron), no idea how many have died and not been recorded or have died from something else and been recorded.... nothing.

All we can discuss is government and human responses and how to profit from them.

 

[rederob]

Thanks for that Rob, good point, I hadn't even thought about that being from W.A.

SGL will probably get a slight lift from Victoria's move to lockdown Melbourne for another 6 weeks.

 

[Sdajii]

Perspective gets lost.
Due to some form of control.

Un restrained around 7% of the population would die
before a vaccination is found that's around 490 million.

If you dont think that would impact life it self let alone
The Markets then your dreaming. Panic--you've seen
nothing yet!!

Everyone knows better---yet now one knows!

Carry on ---Covid 19 will!

If you were to kill a random 7% of the world's population it would have a very significant impact.

This virus does not kill at random. It almost exclusively picks off people who are already close to death. If I was to get the the 7% of the world's population which was going to die of old age, cancer, etc, and killed them five minutes before they otherwise would have died, I would change nothing at all and effectively I wouldn't have killed anyone. This is much closer to what the virus would do than killing a random 7% of the world's population. Look at the average age of deaths from the virus, by country. It's very close to the average life expectancy of those respective countries. In terms of removal of years of human lives it is very low. In terms of removal of quality years of human life it is extremely low.

Yes, there will be unfortunate individuals. Keep in mind that there have already been unfortunate individuals killing themselves because of loss of jobs, businesses, relationships, etc.

Keep in mind that left unchecked the virus would sweep through fairly quickly and we could move on. Keep in mind that when the country digs itself into an economic hole and many individuals have lost businesses and sold their superannuation at deflated prices, the economic devastation will last literally decades. Just this afternoon I made another sale to a person who told me she was using her super she was allowed to sell to pay me. She's in her mid 30s, I've dealt with many people who have done similar things at a wide range of ages. I've already spent several years saying that I don't expect the pension to be much if anything by the time I'm eligible, and now that seems more likely than ever.

We're not going to have a vaccine anyway. It's not even like we're stopping the virus, we're just kicking the can a short distance down the road at extreme cost.

 

[Chronos-Plutus]

If you were to kill a random 7% of the world's population it would have a very significant impact.

This virus does not kill at random. It almost exclusively picks off people who are already close to death. If I was to get the the 7% of the world's population which was going to die of old age, cancer, etc, and killed them five minutes before they otherwise would have died, I would change nothing at all and effectively I wouldn't have killed anyone. This is much closer to what the virus would do than killing a random 7% of the world's population. Look at the average age of deaths from the virus, by country. It's very close to the average life expectancy of those respective countries. In terms of removal of years of human lives it is very low. In terms of removal of quality years of human life it is extremely low.

Yes, there will be unfortunate individuals. Keep in mind that there have already been unfortunate individuals killing themselves because of loss of jobs, businesses, relationships, etc.

Keep in mind that left unchecked the virus would sweep through fairly quickly and we could move on. Keep in mind that when the country digs itself into an economic hole and many individuals have lost businesses and sold their superannuation at deflated prices, the economic devastation will last literally decades. Just this afternoon I made another sale to a person who told me she was using her super she was allowed to sell to pay me. She's in her mid 30s, I've dealt with many people who have done similar things at a wide range of ages. I've already spent several years saying that I don't expect the pension to be much if anything by the time I'm eligible, and now that seems more likely than ever.

We're not going to have a vaccine anyway. It's not even like we're stopping the virus, we're just kicking the can a short distance down the road at extreme cost.

I think we either do it properly or we don't do it at all when it comes to the virus suppression strategy.

We shouldn't be opening up our domestic borders with the outbreak in VIC; we should wait at least two months to see how far it has spread to NSW, the ACT and even SA, from VIC.

The whole nation might go back into lockdown again if we get this wrong; the risk too great and we have to get it right the first time, no margin for error.

 

[sptrawler]

SGL will probably get a slight lift from Victoria's move to lockdown Melbourne for another 6 weeks.

That's interesting, why rice growers?
I would have thought the restaurants would have really struggled with a second lockdown, or do you think the sales of rice will take off, it is a point because a six week lockdown is extreme.
The four week lockdown in W.A stripped the shelves of pasta and rice, so good point a six week lockdown may send them into a real frenzy.
I am seriously considering Kimberly Clarke as an option, they already process fine particulate paper, so to import or adapt equipment to supply different protective devices may not be too difficult.
Even after the virus, one would think a home sourced supplier, may be better patronised.

 

[rederob]

If you were to kill a random 7% of the world's population it would have a very significant impact.

This virus does not kill at random. It almost exclusively picks off people who are already close to death. If I was to get the the 7% of the world's population which was going to die of old age, cancer, etc, and killed them five minutes before they otherwise would have died, I would change nothing at all and effectively I wouldn't have killed anyone. This is much closer to what the virus would do than killing a random 7% of the world's population. Look at the average age of deaths from the virus, by country. It's very close to the average life expectancy of those respective countries. In terms of removal of years of human lives it is very low. In terms of removal of quality years of human life it is extremely low.

Yes, there will be unfortunate individuals. Keep in mind that there have already been unfortunate individuals killing themselves because of loss of jobs, businesses, relationships, etc.

Keep in mind that left unchecked the virus would sweep through fairly quickly and we could move on. Keep in mind that when the country digs itself into an economic hole and many individuals have lost businesses and sold their superannuation at deflated prices, the economic devastation will last literally decades. Just this afternoon I made another sale to a person who told me she was using her super she was allowed to sell to pay me. She's in her mid 30s, I've dealt with many people who have done similar things at a wide range of ages. I've already spent several years saying that I don't expect the pension to be much if anything by the time I'm eligible, and now that seems more likely than ever.

We're not going to have a vaccine anyway. It's not even like we're stopping the virus, we're just kicking the can a short distance down the road at extreme cost.

Deaths is a small part of the equation.
People testing positive should not be at work and will generally not be returning to work for at least 2 weeks
Workplaces with people who have tested positive spend a fortune in deep cleans, usually after days or longer of closure.
Some workplaces have to close completely for weeks or longer as a result of multiple infections.
All these instances have economic multipliers.
Sweden got it mostly right except for the fact they forgot to quarantine older people. The USA has never come close to getting it right.
Some Asian countries were a heck of a lot smarter and have maintained a stringent testing and tracing regime.
Australia is the lucky country.
I still do not understand why in Australia we have never tested so called "essential workers" who still actively cross multiple State borders. For that matter, serology tests are quick and cheap and could have solved a lot of the border crossing problems in respect of people who never resided within cooee of COV19 hotspots.

 

[sptrawler]

SGL will probably get a slight lift from Victoria's move to lockdown Melbourne for another 6 weeks.

I'm also thinking local tour providers and leisure equipment(caravans, camper trailers, motorhomes etc), may see an upsurge.