So is the COVID-19 drama over, or will this go on for some time?

[qldfrog]

It doesn't work. It was known it didn't work a month ago. Big Pharma can make lot of money if it can get approval. It annoys me resources are being spent on this when there are other more promising alternatives.

I agree and just want ASF people who read promising headlines realise the vacuum these great news are based on.

 

[Dona Ferentes]

Now we're entering a three stage pathway out of lockdown, there's a good interview with Peter Doherty in the AFR
https://www.afr.com/life-and-luxury...el-prize-and-i-don-t-give-a-s-20200506-p54qhb
Despite the sense from Doherty that we have dodged a massive bullet, he refuses to confirm we have passed the worst.

"Once we start lifting these restrictions we will see," he says. "We will see if it's just at a level where we see spot fires and we'll be able to quench them. On the other hand, it could flare because it is so infectious.

"The meat works and the construction industry have been out there as an experiment because we never closed them down."

"That's the sort of thing where if we see a flare-up and contain it we are in good shape. On the other hand, if we get multiple flare-ups and get more widespread cases in the community, the worst case is you would have to shut down again, which would be disastrous".

 

[Smurf1976]

Once again my argument is not that we would increase national income (from all the sources mentioned) if we made huge capital investments in steel mills or oil refineries, my argument is that the huge amounts of capital are better used else where in other parts of the economic web of industry.

If we actually did invest in something else then I agree with you.

If it's a steelworks versus blowing another housing bubble though well then the steelworks at least brings in some real wealth.

 

[Smurf1976]

Despite the sense from Doherty that we have dodged a massive bullet, he refuses to confirm we have passed the worst.

I claim no expertise on viruses but it seems logical that having extensive lockdowns during autumn is a somewhat more favourable situation than lesser lockdowns during winter so I think the uncertainty does seem warranted.

It would be premature for anyone to be thinking this is all over in my view. All you can really say with certainty is that if you need to get out and about and get things done, whatever, well then doing so right now is probably wise. The old "make hay while the sun shines" line of thought - further improvement will be slow but there's some chance we see things go backwards.

 

[Value Collector]

If we actually did invest in something else then I agree with you.

If it's a steelworks versus blowing another housing bubble though well then the steelworks at least brings in some real wealth.

We are investing in other things large and small, right across the economy.

 

[Smurf1976]

We are investing in other things large and small, right across the economy.

I don't disagree but I also don't see why both can't be done.

It's not as though capital is scarce. It's so abundant that the problem has been finding somewhere to put it all hence the "everything bubble". It's like air or sunlight, there's so much of it that there's no need to ration it out.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I claim no expertise on viruses but it seems logical that having extensive lockdowns during autumn is a somewhat more favourable situation than lesser lockdowns during winter so I think the uncertainty does seem warranted.

It would be premature for anyone to be thinking this is all over in my view. All you can really say with certainty is that if you need to get out and about and get things done, whatever, well then doing so right now is probably wise. The old "make hay while the sun shines" line of thought - further improvement will be slow but there's some chance we see things go backwards.

I claim no expertise on viruses but it seems logical that having extensive lockdowns during autumn is a somewhat more favourable situation than lesser lockdowns during winter so I think the uncertainty does seem warranted.

It would be premature for anyone to be thinking this is all over in my view. All you can really say with certainty is that if you need to get out and about and get things done, whatever, well then doing so right now is probably wise. The old "make hay while the sun shines" line of thought - further improvement will be slow but there's some chance we see things go backwards.

I'd be getting on with it. A contact in S.Korea tells me they have had over 30 cases in the last 24 hours after nearly 2 weeks with none. This was due in the main to lifting restrictions.

• Build a bridge
• Cheat on your missus
• Erect an edifice

Before it is too late.

gg

 

[qldfrog]

I'd be getting on with it. A contact in S.Korea tells me they have had over 30 cases in the last 24 hours after nearly 2 weeks with none. This was due in the main to lifting restrictions.

• Build a bridge
• Cheat on your missus
• Erect an edifice

Before it is too late.

gg

I like your bucket list GG

 

[Value Collector]

I don't disagree but I also don't see why both can't be done.

It's not as though capital is scarce. It's so abundant that the problem has been finding somewhere to put it all hence the "everything bubble". It's like air or sunlight, there's so much of it that there's no need to ration it out.

there is definitely limits to Australian capital.

 

[Smurf1976]

there is definitely limits to Australian capital.

There may well be but looking at the amount shoved into inflating the price of the same houses we already had, all we'd need to have done would be to take a few % of that to fund just about anything else we could possibly need.

I've nothing against business making a profit and so on, but I'd much rather see a diverse and reasonably higher value economy than one which relies on resource extraction and low value services. There's a role for that, but of itself it's not enough. Those sorts of things always involve competing against the Third World countries, as evidenced by the suggestion that China could buy from elsewhere, and exist at the mercy of the buyers.

It's much the same as someone with nothing to offer other than manual labour is almost always in a weak negotiating position with an employer. In contrast, the further someone goes down the intellectual and value added track, the stronger their bargaining position tends to become.

 

[sptrawler]

It's much the same as someone with nothing to offer other than manual labour is almost always in a weak negotiating position with an employer.

Until he can no longer do the manual labour, then he is thrown on the trash heap with all the others who no longer have anything to offer.
As will happen to Australia on the current trajectory, which isn't a problem for the current generation, but is a huge worry for future generations and Australia as a whole.

 

[sptrawler]

there is definitely limits to Australian capital.

There is a limits to our capital and that limit will fall as our currency falls, unless we start and develop a first World economy.

 

[Dona Ferentes]

The 'spurts are lining up with 'best in show' predictions

Key points:

• Deloitte Access Economics forecasts unemployment will not get back to 5 per cent until late 2024 and the budget will remain in deficit until then
• Most experts agree economic recovery will have to involve tax reform, which could include abolishing state stamp duties and raising the GST
• Some experts want to see the Federal Government bring forward its tax cuts, while others argue cuts for high-income earners should be dumped

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-11/economic-cure-post-coronavirus-is-tax-reform/12227760

"Public enemy number one is not the budget deficit — it's unemployment." - Dr Chris Richardson

Gert people back to work (in a way that doesn't endanger us with more virus spread). I will only take seriously anything that comes from those that have either lost a job or seen a marked reduction in income. It would be hard to find a prognosticator, bureaucrat or politician for that matter that is out of pocket.

 

[Value Collector]

There may well be but looking at the amount shoved into inflating the price of the same houses we already had, all we'd need to have done would be to take a few % of that to fund just about anything else we could possibly need.

I've nothing against business making a profit and so on, but I'd much rather see a diverse and reasonably higher value economy than one which relies on resource extraction and low value services. There's a role for that, but of itself it's not enough. Those sorts of things always involve competing against the Third World countries, as evidenced by the suggestion that China could buy from elsewhere, and exist at the mercy of the buyers.

It's much the same as someone with nothing to offer other than manual labour is almost always in a weak negotiating position with an employer. In contrast, the further someone goes down the intellectual and value added track, the stronger their bargaining position tends to become.

I am all for moving away from property focused investment and into other industries, there are plenty of other industries to soak up capital before we start building steel mills.

but.

a lot of The house price increase in capital cities has been structural.

1, Australia’s population has grown at one of the fastest rates for a developed nation, and that growth has been contained within the capitals.

2, the trend for the last 50 years is that outback towns are dying and shrinking, and having land prices collapse in relative terms, and the migration to the city has added pressure to land prices, so one offsets the other to an extent.

3, Australian Labour and interest rates are expensive in comparison to other countries, this means the cost of adding new housing stock is more expensive than other nations.

 

[Banksy]

being that the Reserve bank is now scraping the bottom of the barrel.. We're on our own moving forwards.. Basically we're about to feel the ramifications start to kick in. Hold on as things are about to drop out BIG TIME

 

[wayneL]

The 'spurts are lining up with 'best in show' predictions

Key points:

• Deloitte Access Economics forecasts unemployment will not get back to 5 per cent until late 2024 and the budget will remain in deficit until then
• Most experts agree economic recovery will have to involve tax reform, which could include abolishing state stamp duties and raising the GST
• Some experts want to see the Federal Government bring forward its tax cuts, while others argue cuts for high-income earners should be dumped

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-11/economic-cure-post-coronavirus-is-tax-reform/12227760

"Public enemy number one is not the budget deficit — it's unemployment." - Dr Chris Richardson

Gert people back to work (in a way that doesn't endanger us with more virus spread). I will only take seriously anything that comes from those that have either lost a job or seen a marked reduction in income. It would be hard to find a prognosticator, bureaucrat or politician for that matter that is out of pocket.

I reckon a big GST hit is London to a brick and Mombasa to a melon, along with measures to introduce a cashless economy.

Both will be a drag on recovery and future prosperity.

The lucky country is history

 

[sptrawler]

I reckon a big GST hit is London to a brick and Mombasa to a melon, along with measures to introduce a cashless economy.

Those two will be at the top of the to do list IMO.

 

[evangeline19]

It's not easy for COVID-19 to be "over" due to the nature of the virus. People without symptoms (asymptomatic) but are infected will go around their business - going to work, shopping at the mall, meeting family and friends without knowing they are infecting others. That's why it is hard to weed out the virus. As a country, the best that can be done is to clamp down on clusters when they emerge. Quarantines are a good method but it doesn't totally kill the virus as the virus is known to be able to linger on in people beyond 14 days. You can google this up. I've read on long-term patients in Wuhan who don't recover but are continually testing positive for the virus. Of course, whether they are infectious or not is another question. If countries are affluent enough, the best course of action would be to test everyone at once. They will detect everyone who have the virus minus false negatives. However, I have not seem this being done in any country yet so far. Thus, all in all, COVID-19 won't be "over" until there is a cure for it.

 

[tech/a]

The number we need to keep an eye on
Even so read the whole article it is dependant on
New case rates

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...ustralia-growth-factor-covid-19/12132478?nw=0

 

[$20shoes]

Taken from the latest MIT newsletter

Why are some people with covid-19 are “superspreaders,” while others aren’t infectious at all.

The scale on which covid-19 patients have an ability to spread the disease is about as wide as it gets. Some single individuals who are infected seem to have a superhuman ability to spread the disease, and are responsible alone for big outbreaks in some communities. Others, meanwhile, barely present as infectious. Here’s what we know so far about why some people are more infectious than others.

• What is a superspreading event: There are only loose definitions for what qualifies as a superspreading event, but one paper from 2005 basically says a superspreading event is essentially a 1 in 100 sort of event—more infections result from this event than in 99% of all other situations that result in the spread of the virus.
• How are superspreading events caused: A myriad of factors can exacerbate transmission, including the lack of ventilation and people in close proximity. But one of the biggest factors has to do with the infected individuals themselves, and how much of the virus they are shedding, which can vary wildly even in the presence or absence of symptoms. Shedding is the release of newly replicated virus particles from the body, which for covid-19 is usually through coughing and sneezing.
• Can we find pinpoint who sheds the virus worse than others: Unfortunately no, we currently cannot anticipate who might be a superspreader and who won’t be. Pathogen scientist Jamie Lloyd-Smith of the University of California, Los Angeles tells Science that from what we’ve learned about covid-19 so far, “most people do not transmit [the virus].” A preprint study suggests that about 10% of infections are the cause for 80% of new cases. And while we’ve identified the superspreading individuals at the root of some outbreaks (such as a choir practice in Washington State that led to 53 infections), most transmissions don’t have a clear origin.