Economic implications of a SARS/Coronavirus outbreak

[rederob]

This is a good point.

May I ask which ones you're thinking of? We should look back in 3months time or so and compare them to the outcome in Sweden (or other countries that didn't go through 'strict' lockdown)

Nice learning exercise.

Vietnam, Jordan, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and many more.
China perfected "lockdowns," isolating positive cases, and mass testing.
Iceland and Denmark proved the effectiveness of extensive testing.
Many European countries showed the value of quickly "flattening the curve."
Unsurprisingly, wearing of masks has been advocated in most countries after they failed to appreciate how quickly the virus could get away.

 

[basilio]

COVID is a wicked problem. Beyond a truly effective vaccine there is no good solution - just varying degrees of bad. Our knowledge of the consequences of the illness is constantly being updated and it doesn't get more promising. In that context I think we need to respect the fact that death is only one serious consequence and that ongoing serious complications can make it a very dangerous proposition if it spreads right across the community. Ignoring that issue in favour of a laissaz faire approach to control seems a choice only sociopathic, willfully blind, scientific illiterates like Donald Trump or Bolsonoro would countenance.

Back to the economic implications of COVID. The ABC has a critical practical analysis of how the layering of personal and business debt is building a very dangerous situation for individuals the banks and the banking system.

Too many elements to simplify into a few words but its a situation that is certainly applicable to 10's of thousands of people.

Shaun's apartment, Maria's business and Gary's mortgage are all linked by one thing: deferred debt
The dominoes in the Australian economy are stacked in line and one can easily topple several others.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07...lian-economy-set-to-fall-coronavirus/12433768

 

[Knobby22]

And letting it run loose doesn't work economically anyway.

We can post counter arguments from varous 'experts' ad-nauseum.

Professor of pathology:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ten-reasons-to-end-the-lockdown-now

Even the WHO promote the Swedish approach:
https://nypost.com/2020/04/29/who-lauds-sweden-as-model-for-resisting-coronavirus-lockdown/


Nobody has the complete answer. Rather, we should ask ourselves which is doing the most damage. (And we should use data to prove it, not statistical anomalies of a 40YO dying from COVID)

The virus only went through a small proportion of Italy and as the article stated many doctors died. Its not a statistical anomaly.And as that expert said the long term effects are nasty. It crosses the blood brain barrier. Will everyone who catches it end up getting so form of early onset Alzheimers? Like how you get lupus from chick pox? We don't know.

I do think that article from the Spectator makes some good points. I am for a controlled approach as is occurring throughout the rest of Australia, it is just maddening that Melbourne has let the country down.

Certain elements of the press keep touting Sweden. The Swedish experiment has failed. I posted that link earlier.. Even Trump is having a go at them saying how much better he has done.

What happens if you don't control it? Recovery stalls And that is the basic problem. You have the sickness, the death, the long term health effects and a bad economy.

In Arizona, Texas, Florida, Georgia and South Carolina, which had edged ahead of other states during their drive in May to reopen commerce, retail foot traffic has slipped below levels elsewhere, information from data firm Unacast showed.

The data, which covers the period through July 3, is not representative of retail sales. But it does highlight the dilemma many economists and health experts have raised from the earliest days of the outbreak of novel coronavirus: Inattention to health protocols like wearing of masks and social distancing combined with a rush to reopen businesses could lead to worse outcomes for both public health and the economy.

“A mismanaged health crisis across many states means short-term gains will transform into medium-term sluggishness as social distancing relaxation is reversed and virus fear lingers,” Gregory Daco, chief U.S. economist at Oxford Economics, wrote in an analysis on Thursday. “It’s now evident that the economy is entering Q3 (third quarter) with much less momentum than previously anticipated.”
https://www.thestreet.com/mishtalk/economics/phone-data-shows-the-retail-recovery-has-stalled-in-covid-hotspots

I just think letting it spread at this stage is a bad idea. If the vaccine doesn't work, then we will have to reconsider it. I would rather watch and wait and slowly open up our economy.

 

[IFocus]

Sweden has a very long way to go to herd immunity

"Sweden’s overall response to the virus has potentially left more people exposed to it, raising questions about herd immunity. But the data have so far been mixed. In a study published in June, the Public Health Agency found that antibodies were only found in 6.1% of the samples collected nationwide in the week ending May 24.

An earlier analysis of 50,000 tests by Werlabs AB, a private company, showed that about 14% of people tested over six weeks in the Stockholm region developed Covid-19 antibodies."

How ever

"The rate of Covid-19 infections is declining in Sweden, which health authorities said is thanks to citizens voluntarily adhering to social distancing guidelines."

Still the reasoning is not totally unreasonable in theory

"Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s state epidemiologist, has maintained that his strategy will prove more sustainable in the long run than the sudden lockdowns and reopenings adopted elsewhere. That’s as some places, such as Beijing, that had appeared to bring the virus under control recently saw fresh outbreaks.

“Part of the reason for Sweden’s less stringent approach was the view that restrictions would need to be in place for some time, and there were doubts about whether society would be compliant with stricter measures over a long period,” said Johanna Jeansson of Bloomberg Economics."

Its all one big experiment no matter which way we go, fact is the future is still uncertain and the rest of the world is locked down in some form or other.

How you treat you weak and elderly is always a measure of your civilisation.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ections-drop-after-steady-distancing-patterns

 

[Smurf1976]

We can either work on an extreme, hardline, erradication strategy (which clearly we're not going to do, it was always unlikely and the boat completely sailed as the BLM protests took place) or we can get on with business as usual/the new normal (*cringe*) and deal with things

I think a key issue there is that there's a reluctance to accept that "the new normal" may in some aspects be extremely different to the recent pre-pandemic past.

Different to the point that some businesses and concepts are dead, kaput, simply unviable going forward.

Those on the losing side of that aren't going to be at all keen on accepting it and will fight all the way.

 

[Smurf1976]

Nobody has the complete answer. Rather, we should ask ourselves which is doing the most damage. (And we should use data to prove it, not statistical anomalies of a 40YO dying from COVID)

Agreed but we also need to consider why such things occur?

If the answer to why someone commits suicide is an economic one then we need to consider how society allocates available resources.

We're still funding the military, we're still paying CEO's ludicrous sums of money and so on. I'm not against capitalism, but if we've got someone earning $100 million a year meanwhile they're laying off staff who then kill themselves well then that's an argument for wider distribution of wealth far more than it's an argument for wider distribution of COVID-19.

 

[over9k]

You mean we shouldn't do exactly what you spent that entire post doing? Gotcha.

Nope I never talked about what should be done, only what will/will not. Very different things.

What WILL be done is more lockdowns. Tas has announced a border reopening delay just now.

 

[Knobby22]

Nope I never talked about what should be done, only what will/will not. Very different things.

What WILL be done is more lockdowns. Tas has announced a border reopening delay just now.

Yea heard they put in a moat between us in Victoria.

 

[rederob]

Yea heard they put in a moat between us in Victoria.

Gladys has sent a message to Donald asking him he got the Mexicans to pay for the wall.
They're all over it.

 

[over9k]

Lol tasmania doesn't have any money to pay for ANYTHING

 

[Smurf1976]

Lol tasmania doesn't have any money to pay for ANYTHING

It doesn't need to - sea level rise a few million* years ago did the job already.

*I haven't checked exactly when but you'd only need to drop the sea level 80m or so to be able to drive across, Bass Strait's mostly very shallow water. That has good aspects in terms of running cables and pipes across, and it has bad aspects with swell and passengers on ships getting a rough ride at times.

I do wonder though whether anyone will try and sneak across to Tas or another state as freight? That is, with themselves inside a shipping container?

I assume the authorities are inspecting them all?

 

[Dona Ferentes]

It doesn't need to - sea level rise a few million* years ago did the job already.

all?

try 8000 years ago.

 

[over9k]

Just saw a headline saying "UK job vacancies decline despite economy reopening" and that really crystallises the whole thing really: People are now at the point of voluntarily isolating, avoiding human contact etc.

You always know you've got a real headache with something when the news headlines contain the word "despite".

 

[Smurf1976]

try 8000 years ago.

I'll take your word for it as I wasn't around to see it happen.....

 

[Smurf1976]

I think one issue resulting from the second lockdown in Victoria and the extension of travel bans to other states is that consumers are going to be extremely cautious next time it's lifted.

If someone's gone from one state to another in a manner which was perfectly legal at the time, and now can't come home without a quarantine bill that many couldn't afford to pay, well that's a serious disincentive to future travel. There's a few reports of that in the mainstream media and it'll resonate pretty loudly with the average person who has limited time and money available that interstate travel is extremely risky for the foreseeable future.

So I'm thinking that there's going to be a reluctance by many to travel even once it's allowed and on this one I think government hasn't done it at all well. Every other cost has been socialised, so should it be for those caught out with the second lockdown otherwise it'll create a lingering reluctance to travel for quite some time.

 

[over9k]

I think I saw something on the news that returning travellers are going to have to pay for their own hotel quarantine too.

 

[Smurf1976]

I think I saw something on the news that returning travellers are going to have to pay for their own hotel quarantine too

That's the issue yes.

They legitimately thought they were right to go, did so, and now find themselves faced with a bill which for some will be unaffordable.

It's a situation that's going to make at least some potential travelers very wary of heading interstate. I think government should have approached it differently in the interests of fairness - if the all clear was given to travel, then any reversal shouldn't be at the expense of individuals.

 

[jbocker]

That's the issue yes.

They legitimately thought they were right to go, did so, and now find themselves faced with a bill which for some will be unaffordable.

It's a situation that's going to make at least some potential travelers very wary of heading interstate. I think government should have approached it differently in the interests of fairness - if the all clear was given to travel, then any reversal shouldn't be at the expense of individuals.

Surely that rule was date stamped, like most others, or people can plead leniency in their case.

 

[Smurf1976]

Surely that rule was date stamped, like most others, or people can plead leniency in their case.

I don't know all the rules and details but there are definitely mainstream media reports about people having traveled and now that we're back into lockdowns again they're finding themselves not only being quarantined when they weren't expecting it but being charged for it too.

Never before has domestic travel carried a credible financial risk in the $ thousands for anyone who booked ahead and so on. I can see that discouraging many for quite some time. Not business travelers so much but I mean grey nomads with a caravan, families taking kids to the big cities or to the Gold Coast etc. Such people are going to be rather wary of potentially being up for $ thousands unexpectedly.

My thinking is an ongoing wariness of even domestic travel once restrictions are lifted. Not everyone of course, but enough to matter quite likely.

 

[qldfrog]

I don't know all the rules and details but there are definitely mainstream media reports about people having traveled and now that we're back into lockdowns again they're finding themselves not only being quarantined when they weren't expecting it but being charged for it too.

Never before has domestic travel carried a credible financial risk in the $ thousands for anyone who booked ahead and so on. I can see that discouraging many for quite some time. Not business travelers so much but I mean grey nomads with a caravan, families taking kids to the big cities or to the Gold Coast etc. Such people are going to be rather wary of potentially being up for $ thousands unexpectedly.

My thinking is an ongoing wariness of even domestic travel once restrictions are lifted. Not everyone of course, but enough to matter quite likely.

Wait till they start localised lockdown aka cluster lockdowns, which means even intrastate travellers will get penalised..
Just continuation of self imposed hardships.