Economic implications of a SARS/Coronavirus outbreak

Smurf1976 said:

Those who look to science are looking to science

Click to expand...

Sorry, i look at numbers i thought it was science more than looking at headlines.when sciences back global warming due to CO2..which actually most real scientists do not or is presented as our medical chiefs, this is no more science than Goebel

SirRumpole said:

Buy one on the internet ?

Free delivery.

Just one example.

Click to expand...

Trouble is, if the only means of internet access someone has is a phone, and that's broken, well then the idea of buying one online only works if they visit a friend and use their computer etc to make the transaction which somewhat goes against the idea of a lockdown.

There's quite a few who don't have any communications other than a mobile. Renters in some cases, younger people fairly commonly, and I'd expect that quite a few who have lost income and are needing to minimise expenses would have ditched fixed broadband along with the magazine subscriptions, gym membership and everything else not essential to living.

Communications hardware of any sort isn't critical to life but it's up there especially given current circumstances. Same with a fridge and so on - not strictly essential but pretty close to it.

Junior said:

We bought a new laptop a few days ago, and picked it up same day. There is still an abundance of online options, and click & collect available.

Click to expand...

Point is - which ones can be done without accessing the internet?

If what someone needs to buy is hardware to get themselves back online be that a mobile or other equipment then buying it online doesn't work.

I see the reasons for lockdowns and so on but I can fully understand the problem with this one. It potentially leaves people with a problem and no means of fixing it other than to break the law.

Smurf1976 said:

Trouble is, if the only means of internet access someone has is a phone, and that's broken, well then the idea of buying one online only works if they visit a friend and use their computer etc to make the transaction which somewhat goes against the idea of a lockdown.

Click to expand...

Yes, I was thinking of the poster who broke his phone, but obviously is still able to communicate with us.

I was just trying to give him a few options, but there would others along the lines you suggest and there doesn't seem to be a lot of options unless they have someone living with them who has a phone. Although if they did visit a friend and wore a mask as did the friend, they could probably do it while maintaining a social distance.

One can buy a range of phones sims and plans in supermarkets. Also Kmart.

There are difficulties in getting stuff without the internet. Picking up a phone and sim should be on the low side of problems.

I imagine if one was looking for a you beaut top of the range or particularly special model there may be a problem. But otherwise...

basilio said:

One can buy a range of phones sims and plans in supermarkets. Also Kmart.

There are difficulties in getting stuff without the internet. Picking up a phone and sim should be on the low side of problems.

I imagine if one was looking for a you beaut top of the range or particularly special model there may be a problem. But otherwise...

Click to expand...

Good point. Prepaid mobiles in supermarkets.

basilio said:

One can buy a range of phones sims and plans in supermarkets.

Click to expand...

Fair point there yes.

I've no idea what phones supermarkets sell but assuming we're talking about smartphones which are not locked to any particular network and which readily tether to a PC etc then it does the job yes.

I'm not arguing against the lockdown per se, just seeing that phones are a reasonably essential thing to have and which can fail at short notice.

This contribution from an Emergency Doctor in a Melbourne hospital brings together many threads on the COVID discussion.

As an emergency doctor in Melbourne, fatigue is settling in. The political blame game isn’t helping
Stephen Parnis

The question for us on the frontline, the unemployed and the distressed must be ‘What do you need?’ not ‘Who is to blame?’

I work with inspiring people in emergency medicine. Doctors and nurses whose compassion sets a benchmark I strive to follow, and allied health workers and support staff who quietly and humbly provide care to people who can be having the worst day of their lives.

Sarah is a senior nurse I have known for 20 years. She is calm in a crisis, practical and confident. She is a colleague I turn to when I find the going difficult. Together, we regularly provide medical and nursing leadership in one of my emergency departments.

This week, for the first time I can remember in those two decades, and despite our masks and face shields, I could see that Sarah was distressed and in tears.

We had a patient who had been brought in by ambulance, struggling with her breathing. Sarah was trying to find a place in our department to give her the assessment and treatment she needed, and it was proving impossible.

This was the fourth such case in two hours.

Delays, a lack of space, people in pain and distress – these are not new to us in emergency. But in the era of Covid-19, it has become an even harder slog, and it gets to us all at some stage. It is well over a month since the second Covid wave hit us, and we have been under the pump ever since.

We have learned in healthcare that to effectively deal with these problems, we must be transparent and honest with each other. We also know that assigning blame achieves very little.

Stephen Parnis: ‘We have learned in healthcare that to effectively deal with these problems, we must be transparent and honest with each other.’
What we experience at work, we see dissected in the daily news. Healthcare worker infections and isolation. Aged care centres facing collapse. The daily Covid case number, and whether the trend is favourable or not. The daily death toll, to which I hope we never become desensitised.

While I can take this news in moderation, I cannot abide another aspect of this all-consuming public discussion – the political blame game.

My emergency specialist training taught me the value of teamwork, prioritisation and a culture of collaboration. When lives are on the line, it’s time for the team to be united and focused, learning as we go and debriefing when the crisis has passed.

My years in medico-political leadership taught me that policy development and decision-making can be complex, difficult processes. All too often, the adversarial system between governments and their opposition counterparts degenerated into name-calling and personal attacks. The result: poor policy, regrettable decisions and expensive, lamentable outcomes.

When we faced the first wave of the pandemic in Australia, the sense of impending disaster was matched by bipartisan political cooperation and dedication to service – unmatched in my lifetime. The national cabinet process, rapid allocation of resources, prompt political support for expert recommendations – all led to the achievement of national preparedness that was unimaginable only months earlier.

Fast-forward to today, and that common sense of purpose has, to a great extent, unravelled.

There are many urgent, critically important issues being faced by communities here and abroad. As I write, many aged care facilities remain at risk of severely compromised care. Hospitals in Melbourne are struggling under the load of patient numbers and staff roster depletion. Businesses of all sizes face the prospect of permanent closure, and their employees are contemplating the devastation of long-term unemployment. The mental health of almost every member of the community is under constant threat.

And yet, so much energy is being diverted away from the necessary, immediate priorities.

I welcome ongoing analysis of our response to the pandemic at every level, whether it be an individual family trying to cope with lockdown, a business trying to keep its employees engaged and productive, or a health setting trying to preserve the safety of its workers and the lives of its patients.

The question for us on the frontline, the unemployed and the distressed must be “What do you need?”, not “Who is to blame?”

And this doesn’t only apply to families, businesses and hospitals. It applies to governments, opposition parties and the media.

At a time when so much is at stake, the main focus for all of us should be on saving lives, preventing outbreaks, mitigating economic damage and protecting the mental health of an entire nation.

Fatigue is setting in, but that cannot be allowed to degenerate into the political games we tolerate in peacetime.

• Dr Stephen Parnis is a Melbourne emergency physician and a former vice-president of the Australian Medical Association
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ling-in-the-political-blame-game-isnt-helping

This is not war! It is a crisis because we have allowed ourselves to accept/believe everything is okay in the world, it has and never will be.

We have become weak.

satanoperca said:

It is a crisis because we have allowed ourselves to accept/believe everything is okay in the world, it has and never will be.

Click to expand...

It was pretty obvious by late January that there was a pandemic going on around the world.

Sadly Australia believed the politics of others rather than slamming the borders firmly shut when the need was apparent. We gained a couple of weeks of "business as usual" foreign tourism and are now paying $ billions and with countless other problems.

Classic case of saving 10c and then paying $10k for having done so.

Smurf1976 said:

It was pretty obvious by late January that there was a pandemic going on around the world.

Sadly Australia believed the politics of others rather than slamming the borders firmly shut when the need was apparent. We gained a couple of weeks of "business as usual" foreign tourism and are now paying $ billions and with countless other problems.

Classic case of saving 10c and then paying $10k for having done so.

Click to expand...

A classic case of having no leaders anymore, warriors who are willing to fight (it was only a short time in the past, that strength, commitment and willingness to sacrifice for one's tribe was what made leaders), to save their loved society/community, instead we are left with fools that couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.

You idiots.

The politicians needed to stall long enough to sell all of their own investments off. Then once they've flogged everything for at worst a minimal loss, then do the right thing closing the borders etc and plunge the economy.

I bet they buy up a whole bunch of stuff just before they announce reopenings or whatever too.

over9k said:

The politicians needed to stall long enough to sell all of their own investments off. Then once they've flogged everything for at worst a minimal loss, then do the right thing closing the borders etc and plunge the economy.

Click to expand...

I generally don't say it so as to avoid being labeled as a conspiracy theorist but there's a reason why I look for discrepancies between the real world and politics yes.

It's another indicator in the box. Like the rest it's imperfect and shouldn't be taken literally but it can give some clues when a divergence occurs.

boofhead said:

I live in NW Tasmania. It had tight lockdowns for a 3 week period. Enough people did the correct thing that the issue was soon under control. K-mart etc. were all shut.

Click to expand...

I'll simply observe that the Tasmanian approach of intentionally using the proverbial sledgehammer to crack a nut seems to have been far more effective than the approach taken elsewhere.

Outbreak > throw everything at it > smashed it > open up.

Economically that brutal but brief approach seems to have done far less damage than the less severe but drawn out process that seems to have been preferred in some other states.

I do wonder about the longer term implications of that for the relative economic performance of the states. Logically I'd think that all things considered, the overall situation is a positive for Tas at least relative to Vic. Decisively smashed it versus ongoing drama - there's bound to be at least some people, those with money and who can choose where they live, paying attention there.

WA, NT, SA, Qld likewise I can't see how they'll lose at least in relative terms. Less virus for those focused on the medical side and less disruption for those focused on the freedom etc argument. At least a portion of those who can choose their location and who don't specifically need to be in the big two cities are likely to give the idea of relocation a thought.

From a W.A perspective, the government and companies have managed to keep the mining sector running through this period, if that had failed who knows what situation Australia would be in.

I'm concerned about the decisions which are looming in 4 weeks' time in Victoria. The easy option will be to extend the current restrictions by a further two weeks. But then what? If you ease too quickly, we'll likely see the numbers creep back up again, and we'll continue to be locked out of the rest of Australia and the world. But if they try to continue to impose tight restrictions, the population will get increasingly restless, the economy will be stuffed, and then all of a sudden it's Christmas time. Good luck telling people they aren't permitted to see their family at Christmas.

It's going to be interesting. Get this vaccine here ASAP.

over9k said:

You idiots.

The politicians needed to stall long enough to sell all of their own investments off. Then once they've flogged everything for at worst a minimal loss, then do the right thing closing the borders etc and plunge the economy.

I bet they buy up a whole bunch of stuff just before they announce reopenings or whatever too.

Click to expand...

Good call.
That happened in the US.

At Least Five U.S. Senators, Briefed on Coronavirus, Sold Stocks Before Market Crash
Calls are growing for a number of U.S. senators to resign, following reports they sold millions of dollars’ worth of stocks after receiving privileged briefings about the threat of coronavirus to the global economy. ProPublica reports Republican Richard Burr, the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, unloaded as much as $1.7 million of his holdings on February 13 in 33 separate transactions. At the time, he had access to classified information about the coronavirus and was receiving daily intelligence briefings. The stock market began plummeting a week after Burr’s sales and has since lost about 30% of its value.


At least four other senators also sold major holdings ahead of the crash: Republicans James Inhofe of Oklahoma, Kelly Loeffler of Georgia and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, as well as Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein. Senator Feinstein is also on the Intelligence Committee, and Senator Loeffler is married to the chair and CEO of the New York Stock Exchange.


The news came as NPR published a secretly recorded audiotape of Senator Burr addressing business leaders and members of the elite Tar Heel Circle at a luncheon in the Capitol Hill Club in Washington on February 27, when there were just 15 confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the U.S.


Sen. Richard Burr: “There’s one thing that I can tell you about this: It is much more aggressive in its transmission than anything that we have seen in recent history. It’s probably more akin to the 1918 pandemic.”


After the NPR and ProPublica stories broke, the hashtag #BurrMustResign trended on social media, and even far-right Fox News host Tucker Carlson called for Senator Burr’s resignation.

Junior said:

Get this vaccine here ASAP.

Click to expand...

Agreed, get the vaccine ASAP, so we can inject you and your family with it first, I will sit back and wait to see what the ramifications are to a rushed vaccine on you first.

Glad you offered yourself and family as the guinea pigs.

"Mr Morrison subsequently told 3AW that the vaccine, if distributed in Australia, would “be as mandatory as you can possibly make it” but that “there are always exemptions on medical grounds”.

I get peter zeihan's newsletter and he had this to say about vaccines:


The dream vaccine would be a one-shot vaccine delivered via nasal inhalant (no syringe required!), be made from yeast, safe to store at room temperature, grant 100% immunity, and last a lifetime. Assuming for the moment such is possible, we're not very likely to hit the bull's eye on the first try.

Instead it's more than merely possible the first "successful" vaccine to market will be one that requires two shots given two months apart, is fabricated using the pancreatic fluids of a llama, only lessens the impact of COVID rather than outright preventing it, must be frozen for transport, and must be re-administered every six months. If that's the one that wins the race, you can bet we'll keep developing alternatives until we find something better.

But while we develop better alternatives, we'll hit another trough. Manufacturers of glass and syringes and stoppers are holding their breath, planning to surge output to whichever candidate proves successful first. Should the first across the finish line not be the ideal vaccine, we will then need to retool everything to supply the manufacturing process for a better vaccine once it proves that it is indeed better. Based on the product requirements, there will be a delay of weeks to months.

Which vaccine is deemed "successful" first matters. No matter which candidate proves successful, global vaccine manufacturing for a fundamentally new cocktail is unlikely to be able to generate more than 100 million doses in calendar year 2020, with an additional one billion to two billion in 2021. If the "winning" mix requires two doses or biannual injections, cut the number of people who can be immunized in half. If it requires two doses and biannual injections, then by the end of 2021 there might not even be enough doses for all American citizens.

So yes, we'll likely identify something "successful" at some point in the fourth quarter of 2020, but add in the time lags for manufacturing and distribution, and the almost-certainty that Americans will have to share some doses with other nations, and the absolute most optimistic schedule possible for achieving mass inoculation of the American population won't be until at least April 2021.

satanoperca said:

Agreed, get the vaccine ASAP, so we can inject you and your family with it first, I will sit back and wait to see what the ramifications are to a rushed vaccine on you first.

Glad you offered yourself and family as the guinea pigs.

"Mr Morrison subsequently told 3AW that the vaccine, if distributed in Australia, would “be as mandatory as you can possibly make it” but that “there are always exemptions on medical grounds”.

Click to expand...

OK, well that's an aggressive response.

Do you think it's better if there is no vaccine? I didn't say "inject me and my family with an untested vaccine".

Perhaps you're a bit thick. I'll re-word it just for you. "Get an effective, tested, safe vaccine here ASAP"