ImageImageImageImageImage

Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve

Moderators: Kilroy, Danny Darko, TyCobb

User avatar
hermes
RealGM
Posts: 84,500
And1: 22,105
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Location: the restaurant at the end of the universe
 

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1761 » by hermes » Mon Mar 30, 2020 12:34 am

Landsberger wrote:No... nobody with his credentials makes a 5 order of magnitude mistake. Especially one that gets adopted by the WHO and CDC. He was on several TV broadcasts touting the initial forecast(which was one of 9 models he did). He had to be summoned to "explain" it. If you are truly into forecasting and statistical analysis then analyze the probability that an analysis can be off by 5 orders of magnitude. That "standard deviation" is absurdly beyond what is statistically acceptable to release to the public. My argument is less about the reaction to what has happened, while I do think it could be worse than the virus, it's more about the truth in our science and especially the science used by our governments. This is junk science that may have been used for the "greater good" but junk science none the less.

just doesn't seem right to me to say that he made a mistake when we won't know the actual number for a long time. the 400k could end up being right (or maybe five orders of magnitude too low), who knows
Landsberger
General Manager
Posts: 8,444
And1: 1,747
Joined: Jul 04, 2016
 

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1762 » by Landsberger » Mon Mar 30, 2020 12:55 am

Danny Darko wrote:I think that stuff is interesting particularly when markets are unstable like now. So do you invest heavily based on what you have learned? haha and do you have a guess when the housing market is going go really start reflecting the recession?


The more I've learned about the markets the less "active" I've become. That said, the ability to technically understand how things happen, liquidity and sentiment has kept me from losing my butt at times. I'm in good shape right now but I'm also in a fairly conservative mix of investments.

A famous investor once said.... when everyone is happy with the market I'm scared.... when everyone is scared in the market... I'm happy. There are a lot of things on sale right now. Markets are 80% psychology and 20% business valuation. Add in electronic high frequency trading, derivatives and leveraged collateralized debt (what blew up the economy in 09) obligations things can move very fast.

As for the housing market I'm assuming that it's already hit.... we just won't see the actually effect until people start buying houses again. That's when the pricing strength will be evident. My guess is that once the employment shock has moved into the system lenders will be more selective and buyers more reluctant. That alone will drive prices down in areas hardest hit. A couple months?

Rates are down but banks liquidity is severely hampered so while money is cheap it may be hard to find for awhile. The overnight lending the Federal Reserve does to keep banks solvent has been at record levels (in the hundreds of Billions)the last week or so. This implies that there is a liquidity crunch. As long as the banks can stay solvent we can recover from this... if they start falling it will be a chain reaction like 09 but with more banks involved as more are leveraged. Only the Fed really knows the status of the banking system.

This is somewhat unprecedented in the electronically connected markets. Once the algorithms start triggering each other things can move quickly in either direction.

My only advice would be to look at the securities beaten down the most. Right now it's the energy sector. That sector has been devastated by the drop in demand as well as the game Russia the Saudi's and Opec are playing with prices. It's going to be volatile but if the price of oil stays below $50ish a barrel several countries could completely collapse so my guess is that the bid will return the price to above that level in a few weeks. Meantime the energy sector has been smashed with Midstream pipelines taking the brunt of it. The risk-reward is on the buyers side if one has a 2-3 year horizon.

The oil dive has created a number of rumors of a bank or two being in trouble. I'm not putting any money to work in financials until the dust clears... that's for sure.
Landsberger
General Manager
Posts: 8,444
And1: 1,747
Joined: Jul 04, 2016
 

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1763 » by Landsberger » Mon Mar 30, 2020 1:04 am

hermes wrote:
Landsberger wrote:No... nobody with his credentials makes a 5 order of magnitude mistake. Especially one that gets adopted by the WHO and CDC. He was on several TV broadcasts touting the initial forecast(which was one of 9 models he did). He had to be summoned to "explain" it. If you are truly into forecasting and statistical analysis then analyze the probability that an analysis can be off by 5 orders of magnitude. That "standard deviation" is absurdly beyond what is statistically acceptable to release to the public. My argument is less about the reaction to what has happened, while I do think it could be worse than the virus, it's more about the truth in our science and especially the science used by our governments. This is junk science that may have been used for the "greater good" but junk science none the less.

just doesn't seem right to me to say that he made a mistake when we won't know the actual number for a long time. the 400k could end up being right (or maybe five orders of magnitude too low), who knows


Could be.... but even he has moved that back to "less than 20,000 in his testimony. Pretty easy to be "right" when you're covering that much ground.

Some interesting at the CDC I came across. The total weekly Mortality (all causes for death) are tracking 7-10K less than the mean of the last few years. So even with COVID-19 killing Americans the overall deaths in the nation are down. My guess is that its driving related deaths moving this needle the most.

To this end.... if COVID-19 kills 100K here in the next 6 months but we save 10,000 lives week elsewhere by shutting everything down we have a total of 160,000 less deaths if this is a linear phenomena. Then again mortality jumps significantly with economic recession/depression.
User avatar
tugs
RealGM
Posts: 13,990
And1: 1,922
Joined: Jul 22, 2010

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1764 » by tugs » Mon Mar 30, 2020 4:58 am

Man, don't undersell yourself. Those skills are really the drivers right now. Have those and you can basically shift careers easily without knowing the hardcore sciences of the institutions you'll be transferring to.
User avatar
tugs
RealGM
Posts: 13,990
And1: 1,922
Joined: Jul 22, 2010

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1765 » by tugs » Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:37 am

Wavy Q wrote:I just spent like 5 grand on workout equipment because I'm losing my mind not being able to go to the gym... gonna try and write it off as a business expense
How can you still go out and buy stuff? I settled with watching videos and doing my own research.

I'm more into calisthenics atm. Really seeing results and I feel great. Currently following Chris Heria and Frank Medrano.
Slava
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 58,086
And1: 29,826
Joined: Oct 15, 2006
Location: København
     

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1766 » by Slava » Mon Mar 30, 2020 6:43 am

Landsberger wrote:
Slava wrote:
Landsberger wrote:
I'd offer that social distancing is, at best, has a minimal effect on the spread. If everyone truly stayed "distanced" it may be effective but everyone doesn't. They stay in their house for a few days at most then go to the store for food, the gas station for gas, go to the dog park and on and on.

I think we'll have to wait and see if there is any true benefit from it.

As for Ferguson.... His statistical progressions based on the two have two adjusted variables. Distance. 3' to 6'. and 30 seconds per encounter down from 60. That's it. So he'd have to know that an additional 3' of distance is worth 5 orders of magnitude. It's what I'd call junk science. I'd also point out that he knows it is as well. Anyone who does any of this stuff does. If the goal was to scare people it was successful. I think that was the goal. I'm not sure you save lives by shutting off economies cold. There is very reliable data that shows that economic despair (which is happening) creates a lot of loss of life in many forms.

As I said, my guess is that a year from now we'll find out that the true death rate is around .2% while the powers the be will completely ignore the consequential damage in both loss of life and in terms of economic destruction. Just another crisis they can "solve".


Unless you've seen Ferguson's models, the only pseudo scientist here is you. I quite honestly don't even know where you are pulling your 3' /6' and 30/60 second assumptions from, as far I know Ferguson did not make those assumptions at least publicly. Social distancing, frequent testing and contact tracing has been the only thing that has worked well in this epidemic.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe you are an epidemiologist either and domain knowledge matters a TON when it comes to forecasting and prediction. If you want to yell at a cloud, pick a different topic than this one.


I listened to his testimony to Parliament on the BBC(it was also broadcast on Bloomberg Europe). He was asked specifically by 3 or 4 other "experts" (all I had was an audio feed) what differed in his models. He answered what I wrote. I've also read similar data point changes from the group at Stanford who is reviewing his model (what he'll share of it).

He testimony differed significantly from his story release to the FT. He had several models yet only one was used in his initial "release". The most shocking one. It was intended to do just that.

As for being a medical expert.... nope. Not in the least. Modeling data? Yeah... going on 30 years of that from every aspect of science as well. Variables are variables and modeling is modeling. There isn't different math when modeling pandemics. Data, variables and statistical methodology with multiple independent models... then analyzing and modeling that data. Of these the one we know the least about with any certainty is the data. He's admitted that as well.

Psychology is the key to markets and a disease's spreading. Panic, overconfidence and communication are all keys to modeling those progressions. There is a large crossover in the data sources used for disease modeling and financial modeling in terms of "crowd response". This stuff isn't invented by each researcher independently.

We just put out a number officially of 200,000 dead in the US (couple hours ago) but it was qualified with it could be wrong by a lot up or down depending on a lot of variables. Not defending or condemning this administration in the least but that's the responsible way of doing this IMHO. The release of the information was basically useless but done anyway.

I'm not arguing anything about the medical outcomes, presumed mitigating factors or the science of epidemiology. Scientifically this cannot be known for a year or two after this runs its course. It's being assumed at this point based on incomplete data for a number of reasons.

Science becomes Junk Science when authorities use it to effect an outcome. Medically it may be a desired outcome (time will tell on that) but the unintended consequences are what's also real.... they weren't modeled or released. They aren't getting the front page and the aftermath will last a lot longer than the virus. Responsible leadership should have this information modeled to the same extent before using it as a way to stop the spread of a virus.

Social distancing is presumed to be working yet progression (based on previous viral outbreaks) has not really been budged off its track of a week ago. Only if you look at his original prediction and take it as fact can you see a different in the trajectory... yet it was never on his released prediction's trajectory nor have been any previous outbreaks of even more communicable(based on current knowledge) diseases.

Overconfidence is why governments push this type of study. It's what they do with expert opinions. The intent is often good but all of the consequences of their action is often not. That's why I'm pointing this out. This one expert released one of several models (the most dramatic one) in a vacuum it seems. You said he and the UK/WHO/CDC undoubtedly saved lives. The WHO took China at face value in November and stated publicly that an outbreak was highly unlikely because the virus was very difficult to contract. The CDC followed. By your logic did they undoubtedly killed people?

UPDATE: They have linked his paper on the university system: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

After reading this briefly I'm even more confused/shocked in the press release and the WHO/CDC's adoption of the headline number.

I'll take back my comments about "his mistake" statistically now. There is no underlying data but the one that got the press is one of the .1% outliers you typically do in a modeling sequence. The mistake was how it was used and reported.


Having briefly skimmed the paper, I still don't understand why you think he is wrong or the consequences of his research and the follow up government actions are bad.

The big number he presents is in the DO NOTHING scenario and its the cumulative fatalities up until the end of October 2020.

Bear in mind, this modeling was done way before the UK government had done anything and all options including keep calm and carry on were on the table.

At this point, we might still hit that number even with stringent measures being adopted or at the same time it could be disaster averted if the number of infections slows down due to better testing and quarantine, followed up by simply reducing gatherings and possibilities for transmission. Once the decision has been taken, everything else is a counter factual. One can be a cynic and say I wish we had gone down that route only to find out what would have transpired but better sense suggests that you often communicate the existence of a worse case scenario in pandemics and force people to act based on it.

I understand the economic impact, job loss, follow up angst etc however if people are alive, you can always drive spending and reboot economies, however once lives are lost and crucial supply chains are broken, it takes far longer to do the same because you essentially have to replace people who would otherwise be alive and able to drive the recovery faster.

I don't agree with the data is data narrative either. I'm doing a PhD in statistical genetics and I come across AI/ML people who come into my profession and think they can revolutionize cancer/diabetes/depression screening in a month with all the data at their disposal only to realize that all their data modeling skill means squat if they don't understand the underlying biological mechanism of disease. I myself have been humbled more than once by the complex nature of human biology as a computer engineer changing lanes to do genetic prediction.
:king:
Landsberger
General Manager
Posts: 8,444
And1: 1,747
Joined: Jul 04, 2016
 

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1767 » by Landsberger » Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:55 pm

Slava wrote:
Landsberger wrote:
Slava wrote:
Unless you've seen Ferguson's models, the only pseudo scientist here is you. I quite honestly don't even know where you are pulling your 3' /6' and 30/60 second assumptions from, as far I know Ferguson did not make those assumptions at least publicly. Social distancing, frequent testing and contact tracing has been the only thing that has worked well in this epidemic.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe you are an epidemiologist either and domain knowledge matters a TON when it comes to forecasting and prediction. If you want to yell at a cloud, pick a different topic than this one.


I listened to his testimony to Parliament on the BBC(it was also broadcast on Bloomberg Europe). He was asked specifically by 3 or 4 other "experts" (all I had was an audio feed) what differed in his models. He answered what I wrote. I've also read similar data point changes from the group at Stanford who is reviewing his model (what he'll share of it).

He testimony differed significantly from his story release to the FT. He had several models yet only one was used in his initial "release". The most shocking one. It was intended to do just that.

As for being a medical expert.... nope. Not in the least. Modeling data? Yeah... going on 30 years of that from every aspect of science as well. Variables are variables and modeling is modeling. There isn't different math when modeling pandemics. Data, variables and statistical methodology with multiple independent models... then analyzing and modeling that data. Of these the one we know the least about with any certainty is the data. He's admitted that as well.

Psychology is the key to markets and a disease's spreading. Panic, overconfidence and communication are all keys to modeling those progressions. There is a large crossover in the data sources used for disease modeling and financial modeling in terms of "crowd response". This stuff isn't invented by each researcher independently.

We just put out a number officially of 200,000 dead in the US (couple hours ago) but it was qualified with it could be wrong by a lot up or down depending on a lot of variables. Not defending or condemning this administration in the least but that's the responsible way of doing this IMHO. The release of the information was basically useless but done anyway.

I'm not arguing anything about the medical outcomes, presumed mitigating factors or the science of epidemiology. Scientifically this cannot be known for a year or two after this runs its course. It's being assumed at this point based on incomplete data for a number of reasons.

Science becomes Junk Science when authorities use it to effect an outcome. Medically it may be a desired outcome (time will tell on that) but the unintended consequences are what's also real.... they weren't modeled or released. They aren't getting the front page and the aftermath will last a lot longer than the virus. Responsible leadership should have this information modeled to the same extent before using it as a way to stop the spread of a virus.

Social distancing is presumed to be working yet progression (based on previous viral outbreaks) has not really been budged off its track of a week ago. Only if you look at his original prediction and take it as fact can you see a different in the trajectory... yet it was never on his released prediction's trajectory nor have been any previous outbreaks of even more communicable(based on current knowledge) diseases.

Overconfidence is why governments push this type of study. It's what they do with expert opinions. The intent is often good but all of the consequences of their action is often not. That's why I'm pointing this out. This one expert released one of several models (the most dramatic one) in a vacuum it seems. You said he and the UK/WHO/CDC undoubtedly saved lives. The WHO took China at face value in November and stated publicly that an outbreak was highly unlikely because the virus was very difficult to contract. The CDC followed. By your logic did they undoubtedly killed people?

UPDATE: They have linked his paper on the university system: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

After reading this briefly I'm even more confused/shocked in the press release and the WHO/CDC's adoption of the headline number.

I'll take back my comments about "his mistake" statistically now. There is no underlying data but the one that got the press is one of the .1% outliers you typically do in a modeling sequence. The mistake was how it was used and reported.


Having briefly skimmed the paper, I still don't understand why you think he is wrong or the consequences of his research and the follow up government actions are bad.

The big number he presents is in the DO NOTHING scenario and its the cumulative fatalities up until the end of October 2020.

Bear in mind, this modeling was done way before the UK government had done anything and all options including keep calm and carry on were on the table.

At this point, we might still hit that number even with stringent measures being adopted or at the same time it could be disaster averted if the number of infections slows down due to better testing and quarantine, followed up by simply reducing gatherings and possibilities for transmission. Once the decision has been taken, everything else is a counter factual. One can be a cynic and say I wish we had gone down that route only to find out what would have transpired but better sense suggests that you often communicate the existence of a worse case scenario in pandemics and force people to act based on it.

I understand the economic impact, job loss, follow up angst etc however if people are alive, you can always drive spending and reboot economies, however once lives are lost and crucial supply chains are broken, it takes far longer to do the same because you essentially have to replace people who would otherwise be alive and able to drive the recovery faster.

I don't agree with the data is data narrative either. I'm doing a PhD in statistical genetics and I come across AI/ML people who come into my profession and think they can revolutionize cancer/diabetes/depression screening in a month with all the data at their disposal only to realize that all their data modeling skill means squat if they don't understand the underlying biological mechanism of disease. I myself have been humbled more than once by the complex nature of human biology as a computer engineer changing lanes to do genetic prediction.


How one obtains the data and the complexity of it is up to the science. Modeling is modeling. I've modeled many things I know very little about. I've worked for companies that have modeled thousands of data sets that we didn't even have full access to. I'm not saying that I created the basis of the model.... rather doing the actual scoping, coding etc. Most scientific researchers I've worked with are great scientists obviously but average at creating models. That's why a lot of universities and research foundations outsource. I've been part of a team that has gotten some researchers over the hump by showing them how to better model the data.

His "do nothing" model was never a plausible model. People will self quarantine and self isolate. It was a model without a reality. He knows that, the people asking for it know that as well. It was put out there as a way to scare people which is the larger point I'm making. There was a report last week with no backup in the Times about COVID-19 possibly damaging the testicles of men under 30. That was such a transparent attempt to scare a segment of the population that wasn't heeding the previous scare tactics it wasn't funny. I'm not a fan of dishonesty for any reason by the people in power. The next time something like this happens people will be less likely to listen to the governments. The WHO has been shown to favor geopolitics over life safety already in this one.

As for saving lives. There is a lot of evidence that mortality per 1000 goes up quite a bit in a population in recession. The disease will last several weeks to a few months in all likelihood the recession could last a couple years. My guess is that no one will tally those deaths and do a real comparison to the deaths from the disease. That would expose the real results of our leadership's actions.

Good luck with the PhD. I didn't work on it but some of the guys I did work with several years ago did a lot of data base building for one of the large Bio-Pharmas. Those data sets are insanely large.
User avatar
Wavy Q
RealGM
Posts: 24,296
And1: 2,368
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
Location: Pull Up
     

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1768 » by Wavy Q » Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:53 pm

tugs wrote:
Wavy Q wrote:I just spent like 5 grand on workout equipment because I'm losing my mind not being able to go to the gym... gonna try and write it off as a business expense
How can you still go out and buy stuff? I settled with watching videos and doing my own research.

I'm more into calisthenics atm. Really seeing results and I feel great. Currently following Chris Heria and Frank Medrano.


I bought it all online, didn't go anywhere to get it.

I tried doing bodyweight routines and plyometrics but man I get bored so quickly, I need heavy barbells lol.
User avatar
hermes
RealGM
Posts: 84,500
And1: 22,105
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Location: the restaurant at the end of the universe
 

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1769 » by hermes » Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:26 pm

Landsberger wrote:Some interesting at the CDC I came across. The total weekly Mortality (all causes for death) are tracking 7-10K less than the mean of the last few years. So even with COVID-19 killing Americans the overall deaths in the nation are down. My guess is that its driving related deaths moving this needle the most.

To this end.... if COVID-19 kills 100K here in the next 6 months but we save 10,000 lives week elsewhere by shutting everything down we have a total of 160,000 less deaths if this is a linear phenomena. Then again mortality jumps significantly with economic recession/depression.

interesting

i wonder if crime in general is down because of all this. cyber crime probably isn't but maybe other stuff is
User avatar
Wavy Q
RealGM
Posts: 24,296
And1: 2,368
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
Location: Pull Up
     

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1770 » by Wavy Q » Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:39 pm

hermes wrote:
Landsberger wrote:Some interesting at the CDC I came across. The total weekly Mortality (all causes for death) are tracking 7-10K less than the mean of the last few years. So even with COVID-19 killing Americans the overall deaths in the nation are down. My guess is that its driving related deaths moving this needle the most.

To this end.... if COVID-19 kills 100K here in the next 6 months but we save 10,000 lives week elsewhere by shutting everything down we have a total of 160,000 less deaths if this is a linear phenomena. Then again mortality jumps significantly with economic recession/depression.

interesting

i wonder if crime in general is down because of all this. cyber crime probably isn't but maybe other stuff is


From what I've been reading it seems largely regional. Metropolitan areas crime rates are down a decent amount, more rural areas aren't seeing a difference.
Landsberger
General Manager
Posts: 8,444
And1: 1,747
Joined: Jul 04, 2016
 

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1771 » by Landsberger » Mon Mar 30, 2020 6:37 pm

Wavy Q wrote:
hermes wrote:
Landsberger wrote:Some interesting at the CDC I came across. The total weekly Mortality (all causes for death) are tracking 7-10K less than the mean of the last few years. So even with COVID-19 killing Americans the overall deaths in the nation are down. My guess is that its driving related deaths moving this needle the most.

To this end.... if COVID-19 kills 100K here in the next 6 months but we save 10,000 lives week elsewhere by shutting everything down we have a total of 160,000 less deaths if this is a linear phenomena. Then again mortality jumps significantly with economic recession/depression.

interesting

i wonder if crime in general is down because of all this. cyber crime probably isn't but maybe other stuff is


From what I've been reading it seems largely regional. Metropolitan areas crime rates are down a decent amount, more rural areas aren't seeing a difference.


This is what I've read as well. Chicago's gang related shootings were down this weekend 50% for example.

Keeping people off the highway (the most dangerous thing a typical person does is drive) is a big contributor to the lower mortality rate. Again, that's typically Metro areas.
Slava
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 58,086
And1: 29,826
Joined: Oct 15, 2006
Location: København
     

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1772 » by Slava » Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:44 pm

Landsberger wrote:His "do nothing" model was never a plausible model. People will self quarantine and self isolate. It was a model without a reality.


I think this is largely culture specific, even in the Nordic countries, where people have a high trust in the government, high education level and common sense, Norway and Denmark have resorted to much tougher measures, including closure of businesses and offices whereas Sweden has been relatively open assuming people will do what's best and its worked out quite well.

Britain also has a flailing NHS that has been struggling with years of budget cuts thanks to the austerity measures of the conservative government so they were particularly vulnerable to an extreme case load. This is one of the main reasons why Ferguson's worst-case scenario was very much a possibility in Britain. Even if people don't die of the virus, the simple overload would mean lesser medical/EMT help for road accidents, heart failures and the regular London crime.

As for saving lives. There is a lot of evidence that mortality per 1000 goes up quite a bit in a population in recession. The disease will last several weeks to a few months in all likelihood the recession could last a couple years. My guess is that no one will tally those deaths and do a real comparison to the deaths from the disease. That would expose the real results of our leadership's actions.


The all cause mortality was always going to fall because of the shutdown, in Italy there is a 75% decrease in overall crime, fewer migrant crossings across the mediterranean, fewer road accidents due to lack of traffic and less drug trafficking etc. That's not indicative of the virus or the response alone. There's historical precedent that suggests strict quarantine measures help reboot the economy faster than an entire nation trying to bounce back under the load of medical bills, health stress and so on and so forth. This is especially acute in the US where an entire generation is already struggling with student loans and other debt.
:king:
Landsberger
General Manager
Posts: 8,444
And1: 1,747
Joined: Jul 04, 2016
 

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1773 » by Landsberger » Tue Mar 31, 2020 3:14 pm

Slava wrote:I think this is largely culture specific, even in the Nordic countries, where people have a high trust in the government, high education level and common sense, Norway and Denmark have resorted to much tougher measures, including closure of businesses and offices whereas Sweden has been relatively open assuming people will do what's best and its worked out quite well.


So a "high trust in government" is what saves lives? This seems to be what you are implying. Sweden's approach to violent crime against women would seem to imply that they are not very trustworthy... but I digress.

Sweden has an advantage that they have a low population density. I applaud their approach actually. Give the public the information in reasonably manner and give them thoughtful guidelines rather than force compliance with measures that are showing to have minimal effect based on the baselines drawn by previous epidemics. This, of course, will only be evident in a year or two when the data is available.

Slava wrote:Britain also has a flailing NHS that has been struggling with years of budget cuts thanks to the austerity measures of the conservative government so they were particularly vulnerable to an extreme case load. This is one of the main reasons why Ferguson's worst-case scenario was very much a possibility in Britain. Even if people don't die of the virus, the simple overload would mean lesser medical/EMT help for road accidents, heart failures and the regular London crime.


Not sure I follow. Nordic countries are smarter, trust government more and have common sense while the UK has a presumably underfunded healthcare system due to political ideology so Ferguson could be right? Sorry but that seems to be what you're saying.

So, if the UK has an issue with extreme caseloads they need to scare and control the public while the Nordic countries presumably are not having high caseloads because their public is more enlightened and therefore not at the same risk?

The NHS is hardly a model for patient processing and the argument that money is the primary issue seems to ignore how bureaucratic systems have evolved over time. My understanding of the "funding cuts" is that in reality the rate of funding growth has been cut because it is unsustainable. This comes from a data analysis I worked on a decade ago comparing many healthcare delivery systems worldwide. It could be outdated but in my experience most reported government "cuts" are just reductions in the rate of increase. Governments rarely if ever truly spend less on trash cans much less bureaucracy. Yes, I call the NHS a bureaucracy. A significant amount of effort, time and money spent in all government service bureaus is spent self preserving thus creating an inefficiency that grows as time passes. Not an ideological argument rather a statistical reality in most cases.

Slava wrote:The all cause mortality was always going to fall because of the shutdown, in Italy there is a 75% decrease in overall crime, fewer migrant crossings across the mediterranean, fewer road accidents due to lack of traffic and less drug trafficking etc. That's not indicative of the virus or the response alone. There's historical precedent that suggests strict quarantine measures help reboot the economy faster than an entire nation trying to bounce back under the load of medical bills, health stress and so on and so forth. This is especially acute in the US where an entire generation is already struggling with student loans and other debt.


I wasn't debating the mortality rate during the shutdowns, rather the long term rise in mortality rates due to economic recession and potentially depression (could happen in isolated areas). Geopolitical instability, migration etc. all correlate with higher mortality rates. The temporary reduction in crime, driving fatalities etc. is a pretty linear result of the shutdown.

My larger point, and one I would love to have the access to the data to model, would be the actual statistical difference in the death rate attributable to the shutdown (my guess based on previous baselines vs this so far is that it's not going to be significantly different) vs the long term loss of life due to the economic results. I'm not talking about top line economic numbers and theories of "quick" reboots economies rather what actually happens to the people in those economies. You have to remember that fewer people in an economy vs M1 and M2 always equals more economic gain. Post war economies recover relatively fast given a stable post war environment. The people? Not so much.

Anyway, the data to support any of this is anecdotal at the moment. We can attempt to draw parallels with previous similar situations but rarely do 2 of these seemingly similar events ever turn out to be similar when the dust settles.

My larger point is that I think it was scientifically irresponsible for the UK, WHO and CDC to use only the unrealistic worst case scenarios in this study as the basis for governmental action. I also think Ferguson should have redacted those portions of his study that were at the either extreme end of his modeling sequence knowing that it would be publicly released. But then again.... he's essentially part of the government of the UK so I also question his independence in this matter.
Slava
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 58,086
And1: 29,826
Joined: Oct 15, 2006
Location: København
     

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1774 » by Slava » Tue Mar 31, 2020 3:55 pm

I think what I wrote and what you interpret are so widely different that I quite frankly don't have the energy to dive deeper to correct any of it.
:king:
User avatar
tugs
RealGM
Posts: 13,990
And1: 1,922
Joined: Jul 22, 2010

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1775 » by tugs » Sun Apr 5, 2020 2:31 am

Did Tom Holland's handstand shirt challenge. Proud to say my quarantine training is paying off
Slava
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 58,086
And1: 29,826
Joined: Oct 15, 2006
Location: København
     

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1776 » by Slava » Wed Apr 8, 2020 5:45 pm

1 month into quarantine and I'm listening to Lana Del Rey while eating a tub of vanilla ice cream. If my estrogen spikes any higher, I'm in trouble.
:king:
TyCobb
Forum Mod - Lakers
Forum Mod - Lakers
Posts: 37,234
And1: 8,857
Joined: Apr 17, 2005
Location: Pitcher's Mound
     

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1777 » by TyCobb » Wed Apr 8, 2020 6:22 pm

:laugh:
Read more, learn more, change your posts.
User avatar
Danny Darko
Forum Mod - Lakers
Forum Mod - Lakers
Posts: 16,437
And1: 4,501
Joined: Jun 24, 2005
         

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1778 » by Danny Darko » Sun Apr 12, 2020 6:54 am

Read on Twitter
Image
User avatar
Danny Darko
Forum Mod - Lakers
Forum Mod - Lakers
Posts: 16,437
And1: 4,501
Joined: Jun 24, 2005
         

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1779 » by Danny Darko » Sat Apr 18, 2020 6:37 am

holy crap... spilled an entire drink on my macbook today and before I could shut it off got a fatal keyboard error. put it on a air filter that blows dry air for 5 hours and everything works... whew... man.

My vehicle needed 700 bucks of work this week, as well so i'm glad for that.
Image
User avatar
Sofa King
RealGM
Posts: 19,276
And1: 2,969
Joined: Jul 27, 2003
Contact:
 

Re: Community Thread LXI: The President We Deserve 

Post#1780 » by Sofa King » Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:11 pm

Danny Darko wrote:holy crap... spilled an entire drink on my macbook today and before I could shut it off got a fatal keyboard error. put it on a air filter that blows dry air for 5 hours and everything works... whew... man.

My vehicle needed 700 bucks of work this week, as well so i'm glad for that.

What was the drink?

Return to Los Angeles Lakers