This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Economic implications of a SARS/Coronavirus outbreak

Jump to new
But back to the point, it is good news.i think we need some.i also always wonder about the morale of someone sick and 65y old +.
With doom everywhere, he she must think this is the end and that does not help any recovery
A more balanced outlook would help and save lives
 

Emphasis mine.

If the amount of money thrown at it didn't get results then that would raise some rather obvious and undeniable questions regarding society's reliance upon free market capitalism to drive innovation and the notion that this can overcome any problem so long as enough money's thrown at it.

From an ideological economic perspective vaccination as a solution to this pandemic would represent a massive symbol of capitalist success. Lots of money = solution found shows that the concept works.

Conversely the argument that vaccination can't be developed and implemented as a solution is essentially an argument for big government protecting society from itself as the only real alternative.

Thus far I'm in the capitalist camp. Develop a vaccine and implement it seems like the least bad solution if it can indeed be done.
 
Smurf1976 said:
Thus far I'm in the capitalist camp. Develop a vaccine and implement it seems like the least bad solution if it can indeed be done
Click to expand...

I wonder if cooperative capitalism would work better than the competitive capitalism we see at the moment.

Both have their pros and cons but need there be a lot of losers and one big winner, or maybe there is more than one solution ?

I suppose the market will decide but its out of the individuals hand and in government hands anyway as to which vaccine we eventually get.
 
We do not have true competitive capitalism ATM. As I've stated 100 times on this forum what we have is... Choose your favourite term, crony capitalism or corporatism.

For what true capitalism might look like in terms of finding a vaccination for covid-19 you may want to look up game theory.
 
wayneL said:
We do not have true competitive capitalism ATM. As I've stated 100 times on this forum what we have is... Choose your favourite term, crony capitalism or corporatism.
Click to expand...
Agreed although the situation is still a test of the present system.

Rather a lot of things in society are based upon the idea that we don't need to worry about "x" since if it happens then solutions will be found.

If solutions aren't found, well then that pulls the rug from under all sorts of things built upon that assumption.

That's an observation not me wishing for it.
 

Yes but under the current system we have at situation of extreme moral hazard, aka the Fed put.

Under normal capitalist markets there's absolutely nothing wrong with entities underwriting their risk at their own expense.

That is a function of capitalism.

however we have a situation at the moment where the largest entities have their risk underwritten by the Federal Reserve (speaking in US terms of course, however the same applies in all other Western economies, to a greater or lesser degree).

This is not a function of capitalism at all, rather a function of corporatism, crony capitalism... Or if we really want to get down to, it is economic fascism.

And in my opinion economic fascism has a very incestuous relationship with economic marxism.

In a functioning capitalism, as so abley highlighted by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, players will position themselves for the inevitable black swan/fat tail event.

Crony capitalism seeks to eliminate or severely curtail natural Black swan events.

This is severely distortional and deleterious to the functioning of a normal capitalistic society.

I understand exactly what you're observation is, but what I am saying is, if I can put it a little bit crudely, is that it sucks dogs bollocks and nothing to do with true capitalism.
 
QAN management today indicated that a return to International travel is not envisaged before July 2021.
So there goes international tourism, Sydney, Melbourne, and Cairns will be significantly affected. I cannot see domestic tourism making up for it.

QAN flights are flying within Australia at 20% of capacity. Many of those passengers would be FIFO, ADF, Family related, with the Shane Warne fragrance corporate mob sitting on Zoom and a call from HR.

If not exactly rooted, we are close to it. The government will print more money.

Another thought, can cryptos print more crypto, or will they be extinguished by the tide of paper moolah.

gg
 
Now that you've so graciously gotten us back onto topic, here's that recipe you were asking for:
https://www.taste.com.au/recipes/lime-marmalade/722ae550-5e12-41ea-b343-3c15efff4417
 
all good if it was just a matter of piling up blocks to make a bigger building or similar but here , we have to deal with real science/nature, not fake dollars
Does anyone believe that with enough money thrown at it, we can go back in time and travel to have a first class seat at the waterloo battle?
Science still has a role to play:
with enough money, you can hide and misled a lot , people could believe they are back in time, etc but it will not happen;
basically the vaccine story, science and reality clash and no one to tell the real story
for info: HIV vaccine failure 40y down the track give you an idea of the challenges ahead:
https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/development-hiv-vaccines

In my limited but not negligible amount of knowledge, efforts would be better rewarded trying to find efficient treatment more than a wet dream vaccine, but the denial of already existing reasonably effective and working treatments, prevention in favor of a vaccine can hardly be more than a brainwash attempt.To what purpose?
People have never had so much information available, freely and to all, yet have hardly been worse at processing, analysing it.
To go back to the economic thread: CSL today at $300, up 10% since the beginning of august, I hope many have followed my fake vaccine argument and the money to be made with CSL..
I will recommend selling within 6 months ofinitial deployment to avoid the backslash and class actions to follow :-(, unless government cover that side

I genuinely know understand how these Nigerian scammers can be so successfull
 
PZ99 said:
800 billion down the swanny > https://www.news.com.au/finance/eco...e/news-story/8d6b004276cb447763b75dcf492b54a8
Click to expand...

So can you put a price on a human life? I have asked this before, I will give it a crack based on above article.

Calculate the possible number of deaths if we did very little, say the USA
Population 330M
Over the next year 330K of deaths
Percentage of deaths by population of 0.1%

or Sweden
Population 10M
Over the next year 10K of deaths
Percentage of deaths by population of 0.1%

So let's take the 0.1% mortality rate
Aussie Pop 25M
Expected number of deaths if we did nothing 25k

Cost of our actions expected to be $800B
By doing something, we have saved 96% of lives
Average costs of saving those lives $33M each

Never knew I was worth so much.
 
If you take that to its logical conclusion you could breakdown how much of that $33m is allocated to your vote
 
Agreed.

My point though is that rather a lot of things in society are based upon the notion that money can indeed solve any problem.

That's the underlying rationale for the argument that we don't need to worry about, for example, the loss of helium gas from the planet, soil acidification or the depletion of phosphate deposits since throwing enough $ at it will come up with a solution. If that's not true, if money can't buy time travel, well then that does blow the entire basis of rather a lot of what humanity is doing to pieces.

What I'm seeing is that a forced acceptance that science can't be overcome by economics has broader implications. Once that's accepted in the context of a COVID-19 vaccine, anyone arguing from the science side in a science versus economics argument about any subject is going to be far harder to dismiss. It's not as though the pandemic's going to be forgotten in a hurry.

I'm basically seeing it as a plausible trigger for a broader shift in thinking. With humanity and in particular economics slapped firmly in the face by science reality, it's going to be far harder to dismiss credible scientific arguments on the basis that economics will always come up with a solution to any problem.

I'm seeing it as a possible trigger for a broader refocusing basically. Economically that's not so much good or bad as it's a change of focus and an ending of the past ~40 years where finance was seen as the be all and end all of everything.
 

Excellent statement.

Maybe we will see more science based economics in areas like bio security where we seem to have dropped our guard on things like plant and animal imports in the name of so called free trade agreements and therefore risk our agricultural products being subject to diseases hitherto unknown here.

The open borders idea has definitely gone too far, but reality has definitely put the kybosh on a lot of thoughts about unrestricted travel. Pity Border Farce was so keen on keeping a few refugees out , but not those with money to spend (like in casinos).
 
Last edited:

In the US they took extreme action, in dollar terms.

By far the biggest stimulus package of anywhere on the planet. 3 times the size of what Obama unleashed in the GFC.
 
Thanks Junior for adding to the discussion of the economics of a society dealing with a virus that takes life.
Hence my question: How much is a life worth should be rephrased to: How much can a community pay to save a life?
 
satanoperca said:
Thanks Junior for adding to the discussion of the economics of a society dealing with a virus that takes life.
Hence my question: How much is a life worth should be rephrased to: How much can a community pay to save a life?
Click to expand...

That's a reasonable question, but medical decisions are not made by accountants they are made by doctors who take a Hippocratic oath to "do no damage" first, ie they don't go around making decisions that take lives, it's not their job.

If a person is comatose and not likely to recover, the patient's family in consultation with the doctors and any previously expressed wish of the patient make the decision not to continue.

ie the decision about allocation of medical resources is made in terms of likely outcome not finances, that's the only sensible way of doing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
WEF corrupts countries
Replies
6
Views
365
SirRumpole
Trump Era 2025-2029 : Stock and Economic Comment
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
5K
Smurf1976
US Election 2024 : Stock and Economic Comment
7 8 9
Replies
171
Views
10K
divs4ever
M
Cooling Australian Property Market Signals Economic Trends
Replies
1
Views
1K
Joe Blow
Electricity investments
Replies
8
Views
567
Smurf1976
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...