the silver lining of the coronavirus crisis

[ender]

Probably not popular, but in some very specific cases, dying from this virus might significantly reduce suffering for the individual. For example, someone who is already dying, slowly and painfully, of cancer or some other terminal illness. If their suffering is cut from 6 months down to a few days for example. That's a silver lining. And if our society was better at dying with dignity in general it might not be the case, but we generally suck at it (and you don't even have to get into euthanasia, just doing hospice for someone vs subjecting them to chemo/radiation that can only make them sicker and miserable would be a massive improvement).

Funny, I thought something similar when the facility in Kirkland experienced multiple fatalities early on in this crisis. Specifically, there was a grieving woman quoted, and a picture of her with her 85 year old mother published. The mother was gripping a baby doll, probably indicating that she was suffering from some form of dementia. Having first-hand experience with same, my immediate thought was that at least the mother was spared the indignity of forgetting how to manage every facet of everyday life, including how to swallow and finally even how to breathe. While her death was certainly sad, it was not tragic. In some cases, hastening death is a tender mercy. If it was me in the same situation wiith no hope for recovery, I believe I'd opt for a fairly speedy demise rather than long, drawn out process.

I really wish we could know answers to questions like:

• How many people who die of covid19 would have died in 6 months regardless?
• How many people who die of covid19 would have died in 12 months regardless?
• How many people who die of covid19 would have lived 5+ years had it not happened?

[GuitarStv]

I have enjoyed the conversations about a bottom-up bail out instead of the top-down variety issued after 2008.  The crooks who got the country into the mortgage backed securities mess were deemed "too big to fail" and were given massive bailouts.  They took the money, handed out huge bonuses to each other (retention bonuses no less) and clapped themselves on the back for being so clever. 

Today I heard talk among smart people of spending the same amount, only giving it to the front line employees to assure they can hang on through this obviously transient situation, and CEOs are talking about a 50% pay cut through this time.  Way, way different than 10 years ago and damn refreshing.   

I'm just glad there's complaints about the airline industry wanting a bailout after spending so much on share buybacks.

The airlines will definitely be bailed out, and they need to be, but I hope that whatever it entails isn't a free pass.   Maybe debt for warrants or equity in the company or higher capital requirements going forward (like what was required for banks), a profit sharing/unemployment pool for employees, etc.

Great news on the bailout.  I mean, if we don't bailout the air industry . . . then we can't easily spread another pandemic by having people needlessly flying from place to place all the time.  That would be just terrible.  :P

[frugalnacho]

I have enjoyed the conversations about a bottom-up bail out instead of the top-down variety issued after 2008.  The crooks who got the country into the mortgage backed securities mess were deemed "too big to fail" and were given massive bailouts.  They took the money, handed out huge bonuses to each other (retention bonuses no less) and clapped themselves on the back for being so clever. 

Today I heard talk among smart people of spending the same amount, only giving it to the front line employees to assure they can hang on through this obviously transient situation, and CEOs are talking about a 50% pay cut through this time.  Way, way different than 10 years ago and damn refreshing.   

I'm just glad there's complaints about the airline industry wanting a bailout after spending so much on share buybacks.

The airlines will definitely be bailed out, and they need to be, but I hope that whatever it entails isn't a free pass.   Maybe debt for warrants or equity in the company or higher capital requirements going forward (like what was required for banks), a profit sharing/unemployment pool for employees, etc.

Great news on the bailout.  I mean, if we don't bailout the air industry . . . then we can't easily spread another pandemic by having people needlessly flying from place to place all the time.  That would be just terrible.  :P

Serious question...why do we need to bail out the airline industry?  Will the planes or airports evaporate if we allow the industry to go bankrupt? 

[ender]

Serious question...why do we need to bail out the airline industry?  Will the planes or airports evaporate if we allow the industry to go bankrupt?

Even if the industry goes bankrupt, feels like someone might swoop in and buy them for cheap.

[OtherJen]

I have enjoyed the conversations about a bottom-up bail out instead of the top-down variety issued after 2008.  The crooks who got the country into the mortgage backed securities mess were deemed "too big to fail" and were given massive bailouts.  They took the money, handed out huge bonuses to each other (retention bonuses no less) and clapped themselves on the back for being so clever. 

Today I heard talk among smart people of spending the same amount, only giving it to the front line employees to assure they can hang on through this obviously transient situation, and CEOs are talking about a 50% pay cut through this time.  Way, way different than 10 years ago and damn refreshing.   

I'm just glad there's complaints about the airline industry wanting a bailout after spending so much on share buybacks.

The airlines will definitely be bailed out, and they need to be, but I hope that whatever it entails isn't a free pass.   Maybe debt for warrants or equity in the company or higher capital requirements going forward (like what was required for banks), a profit sharing/unemployment pool for employees, etc.

Great news on the bailout.  I mean, if we don't bailout the air industry . . . then we can't easily spread another pandemic by having people needlessly flying from place to place all the time.  That would be just terrible.  :P

Serious question...why do we need to bail out the airline industry?  Will the planes or airports evaporate if we allow the industry to go bankrupt?

I also wondered that. Didn't they report record profits last year? We as individuals are told to have cash emergency funds and to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps (usually by the GOP, who tend to fall all over themselves to give money to corporations). Maybe we should be asking why the airlines didn't reserve some of those huge profits for a downturn. Maybe they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps. I'd rather the bailouts go to small businesses.

[Buffaloski Boris]

I was reading this article about the Australian Federal bank and it reminded me of the discussions around "what if everyone cuts their expenses, won't the economy collapse?".

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-19/reserve-bank-coronavirus-response-losing-control/12071872

Well it's kind of looking like everyone has just been forced into mustachianism - no overseas holidays, no eating out, or at least a lot less right now in Australia. So we get a temporary vision of what it would be like.

The result isn't actually great (for Australia at least). It makes me question what I was doing being a part of it.

Also all the grocery hoarding has made me realise that I've hoarded money/ capital. Self reliance is good but it's not actually what I want. I want to be part of a community that supports, gives and receives.

TL/DR: So the silver lining is that
1) I have answers to what were previously rhetorical questions and
2) I know myself better

I read the article. Central banks never had control. This is all human behavior and good luck in keeping that under control.

The problem with sudden austerity is, well, it’s happening suddenly. People panic. And that usually isn’t pretty.  They’ll adapt though, often quite quickly. Not to understate the pain. There will be a lot. But people will make it.

[Buffaloski Boris]

More great stuff:

-getting to try homeschooling. For real.

-making lunch for the kiddos.

-the dog is loving that we’re home.

-fewer porch pirates.

[Reader]

I really wish we could know answers to questions like:

• How many people who die of covid19 would have died in 6 months regardless?
• How many people who die of covid19 would have died in 12 months regardless?
• How many people who die of covid19 would have lived 5+ years had it not happened?

you can, from a statistical point of view, based on past actuarial data.
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html

[Reader]

Serious question...why do we need to bail out the airline industry?  Will the planes or airports evaporate if we allow the industry to go bankrupt?

if the airlines supporting the air transport hubs disappear, the infrastructure has no one to use them.

air transport is an enabler for many things we take for granted - same day deliveries, a wide variety of food, products, essentials from all across the globe. a modern economy may also be viable only with air transportation. tourism/entertainment/restaurant jobs are also dependent on travel. we'll find out in the next few weeks to months the impact of widespread air travel cuts on tourism dependent countries like new zealand or cities like venice.

[lutorm]

we'll find out in the next few weeks to months the impact of widespread air travel cuts on tourism dependent countries like new zealand or cities like venice.

Yeah, Hawaii will be in a world of hurt. Tourism is >20% of the economy here.

All the Hawaiians who would like to get their land back from the mainlanders and tourists might get to try it.

[Halfsees]

Probably not popular, but in some very specific cases, dying from this virus might significantly reduce suffering for the individual. For example, someone who is already dying, slowly and painfully, of cancer or some other terminal illness. If their suffering is cut from 6 months down to a few days for example. That's a silver lining. And if our society was better at dying with dignity in general it might not be the case, but we generally suck at it (and you don't even have to get into euthanasia, just doing hospice for someone vs subjecting them to chemo/radiation that can only make them sicker and miserable would be a massive improvement).

Funny, I thought something similar when the facility in Kirkland experienced multiple fatalities early on in this crisis. Specifically, there was a grieving woman quoted, and a picture of her with her 85 year old mother published. The mother was gripping a baby doll, probably indicating that she was suffering from some form of dementia. Having first-hand experience with same, my immediate thought was that at least the mother was spared the indignity of forgetting how to manage every facet of everyday life, including how to swallow and finally even how to breathe. While her death was certainly sad, it was not tragic. In some cases, hastening death is a tender mercy. If it was me in the same situation wiith no hope for recovery, I believe I'd opt for a fairly speedy demise rather than long, drawn out process.

As someone who in the last year pulled my father off of life support based on his living will and then watch him die of sepsis, I can appreciate all this. My father had a pretty terrible death, but it was weeks, not years, and he got to live on his own terms up to the point that he collapsed. I like to think his freedom was worth the price he paid. I don't support euthanasia because it seems too easy to abuse, but you do wish a swift death when you see people suffering.

[RetiredAt63]

Serious question...why do we need to bail out the airline industry?  Will the planes or airports evaporate if we allow the industry to go bankrupt?

if the airlines supporting the air transport hubs disappear, the infrastructure has no one to use them.

air transport is an enabler for many things we take for granted - same day deliveries, a wide variety of food, products, essentials from all across the globe. a modern economy may also be viable only with air transportation. tourism/entertainment/restaurant jobs are also dependent on travel. we'll find out in the next few weeks to months the impact of widespread air travel cuts on tourism dependent countries like new zealand or cities like venice.

The NZ PM pointed out that they get a lot of goods on passenger planes.  The demand for cargo planes (and maybe more of them as passenger planes become fewer) will certainly continue.

[HBFIRE]

Biggest silver lining I think will be real estate opportunities for those who were priced out of the market.

Here's whats happening right now:   1) purchase contracts are getting cancelled at high levels, 2) people are listing at a higher rate trying to cash in before a big drop 3) banks are tightening credit due to more risk of default  4) inventory will rise with all of these factors with far few qual'd buyers.    I think in about 6 months we'll see a big drop.

[Bloop Bloop]

Biggest silver lining I think will be real estate opportunities for those who were priced out of the market.

Here's whats happening right now:   1) purchase contracts are getting cancelled at high levels, 2) people are listing at a higher rate trying to cash in before a big drop 3) banks are tightening credit due to more risk of default  4) inventory will rise with all of these factors with far few qual'd buyers.    I think in about 6 months we'll see a big drop.

Yep, and in particular a credit crunch would be helpful because it would reduce house prices independent of people's incomes, meaning those with high incomes or good savings will have more relative affordability than they do now. (If houses cost $800k each, then the difference between someone on $80k vs someone on $120k is small in the long run; if houses cost $400k each, then the latter suddenly has a lot more purchasing power in relative terms).

It won't just be those who are currently priced out of the market who benefit. It will be those who are currently in the market but looking to pick up distressed stock on the cheap. There will be lots of opportunities to hopefully build a new nest egg like what happened after 2008. This applies equally to property and shares.

Also, I think with poor trading conditions, you might score a deal on a car (new or used) as well since dealerships will be struggling.

[HPstache]

Silver lining: I stopped biting my nails after 30-some off years.  Turns out imagining a deadly virus under you nails is a pretty good habit breaker!

[Warlord1986]

My God, the self-righteousness is nauseating. There's a world-wide pandemic and we are on the brink of another terrible economic collapse, but yeah, maybe people will learn to conserve their paper products and be as virtuous as the OP.

[Dicey]

Probably not popular, but in some very specific cases, dying from this virus might significantly reduce suffering for the individual. For example, someone who is already dying, slowly and painfully, of cancer or some other terminal illness. If their suffering is cut from 6 months down to a few days for example. That's a silver lining. And if our society was better at dying with dignity in general it might not be the case, but we generally suck at it (and you don't even have to get into euthanasia, just doing hospice for someone vs subjecting them to chemo/radiation that can only make them sicker and miserable would be a massive improvement).

Funny, I thought something similar when the facility in Kirkland experienced multiple fatalities early on in this crisis. Specifically, there was a grieving woman quoted, and a picture of her with her 85 year old mother published. The mother was gripping a baby doll, probably indicating that she was suffering from some form of dementia. Having first-hand experience with same, my immediate thought was that at least the mother was spared the indignity of forgetting how to manage every facet of everyday life, including how to swallow and finally even how to breathe. While her death was certainly sad, it was not tragic. In some cases, hastening death is a tender mercy. If it was me in the same situation wiith no hope for recovery, I believe I'd opt for a fairly speedy demise rather than long, drawn out process.

As someone who in the last year pulled my father off of life support based on his living will and then watch him die of sepsis, I can appreciate all this. My father had a pretty terrible death, but it was weeks, not years, and he got to live on his own terms up to the point that he collapsed. I like to think his freedom was worth the price he paid. I don't support euthanasia because it seems too easy to abuse, but you do wish a swift death when you see people suffering.

I'm sorry for your loss, @sehr.  I went through this with an older friend. He tripped and fell, and somehow developed sepsis. He was terminally ill with something else, so he decided to yield to it instead of fight. I spent his last hours with him in the hospital and watched him pass in the wee hours of the night. A swift death looks more and more humane the older I get.

[Reader]

The NZ PM pointed out that they get a lot of goods on passenger planes.  The demand for cargo planes (and maybe more of them as passenger planes become fewer) will certainly continue.

Yeah, here's an interesting article on how much airlines make per passenger vs cargo. our excess luggage is way more valuable than us :)
https://skift.com/2014/08/04/when-airlines-worry-more-about-cargo-than-they-do-about-passengers/

but i'm not sure if cargo is able to keep the airlines afloat. cathay pacific from Hong Kong had cut its flights back by 96% in Apr/May. imagine having to cut your business by 96%...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/cathay-pacific-cuts-96-25-of-its-network-as-coronavirus-causes-global-aviation-contraction/ar-BB11tBNo

[Leisured]

Some naysayers say there is no silver lining, but is an ill wind that does nobody any good. Onlty a small proportion will die, and flu takes some people every year.

One big silver patch is that COVID will pull China into line, and make it difficult for China to throw its weight around. China relies on global trade, and less trade means less foreign income. People are now aware how unwise it is to have one nation being the factory of the world and people will diversify towards say India and Indonesia. Africa is moving towards being Greater China, because China gets agricultural land in Africa in return for building infrastructure and demanding rights for Chinese to settle in Africa. COVID will slow this process down.

Interesting point about airlines. Airlines were profitable before COVID and will be profitable after COVIFD. They just need to get through a bad spot. Cut executive remuneration in the next six months, and cut dividends. Travel agents were profitable before COVID and will be so again after COVID.

[ender]

I really wish we could know answers to questions like:

• How many people who die of covid19 would have died in 6 months regardless?
• How many people who die of covid19 would have died in 12 months regardless?
• How many people who die of covid19 would have lived 5+ years had it not happened?

you can, from a statistical point of view, based on past actuarial data.
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html

Sort of.

That is fully averaged probabilities. The question I'm asking is more subtle. We know covid19 is likely to affect people with existing conditions more and the more serious those preexisting conditions, the worse it is.

From that chart, 5.8% of 80 year old men and 4.3% of women are going to die in the next year regardless of covid19. For 89 year olds, it's 14.8% and 11.6% respectively.

Comparing to Italy's statistics (I can only find 80-89 year old data, if there is more granular and/or updated data let me know, that was a week old) men in the 80-89% group have a 19.3% fatality rate and women are at 13%. Italy is also reporting any person who dies who has covid-19 in this data.

Ideally we'd also be comparing this for Italy's actuarial tables to for age.

If the death rates in the USA hold true to what Italy's are for that age group, 10.3% of men on average would die in the next year regardless of covid-19. If we say that only 1/3 of those are unrelated to covid-19 (falling perhaps) then around 6.9% would die from a similar disease to covid-19. So, taking the 19.3% fatality rate at face value, a more pragmatic rate is closer to 19.3% - 6.9% or around 12.4%.

There are obviously a large number of assumptions going into all of this and the point I'm trying to make isn't "go proclaim these numbers as gospel truth" but more, this is the type of analysis we need to be considering when looking at "raw" death rates.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

I really wish we could know answers to questions like:

• How many people who die of covid19 would have died in 6 months regardless?
• How many people who die of covid19 would have died in 12 months regardless?
• How many people who die of covid19 would have lived 5+ years had it not happened?

you can, from a statistical point of view, based on past actuarial data.
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html

Sort of.

That is fully averaged probabilities. The question I'm asking is more subtle. We know covid19 is likely to affect people with existing conditions more and the more serious those preexisting conditions, the worse it is.

From that chart, 5.8% of 80 year old men and 4.3% of women are going to die in the next year regardless of covid19. For 89 year olds, it's 14.8% and 11.6% respectively.

Comparing to Italy's statistics (I can only find 80-89 year old data, if there is more granular and/or updated data let me know, that was a week old) men in the 80-89% group have a 19.3% fatality rate and women are at 13%. Italy is also reporting any person who dies who has covid-19 in this data.

Ideally we'd also be comparing this for Italy's actuarial tables to for age.

If the death rates in the USA hold true to what Italy's are for that age group, 10.3% of men on average would die in the next year regardless of covid-19. If we say that only 1/3 of those are unrelated to covid-19 (falling perhaps) then around 6.9% would die from a similar disease to covid-19. So, taking the 19.3% fatality rate at face value, a more pragmatic rate is closer to 19.3% - 6.9% or around 12.4%.

There are obviously a large number of assumptions going into all of this and the point I'm trying to make isn't "go proclaim these numbers as gospel truth" but more, this is the type of analysis we need to be considering when looking at "raw" death rates.

You know you're talking about people, right?

This kind of thought process is BS as far as I'm concerned. Who cares how many would have died?? Does that mean it's ok that they died of this? Because the end of this thought process is that it's ok to sacrifice x amount of people. Where does that leave you when those people are gone and the virus is still raging?

[ender]

You know you're talking about people, right?

This kind of thought process is BS as far as I'm concerned. Who cares how many would have died?? Does that mean it's ok that they died of this? Because the end of this thought process is that it's ok to sacrifice x amount of people. Where does that leave you when those people are gone and the virus is still raging?

My point is to use math/statistics correctly and in context. You can use them to draw whatever conclusion you like.

12.4% of people aged 80-89 dying certainly seems important to me... is it not meaningful to you?

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

You know you're talking about people, right?

This kind of thought process is BS as far as I'm concerned. Who cares how many would have died?? Does that mean it's ok that they died of this? Because the end of this thought process is that it's ok to sacrifice x amount of people. Where does that leave you when those people are gone and the virus is still raging?

My point is to use math/statistics correctly and in context. You can use them to draw whatever conclusion you like.

12.4% of people aged 80-89 dying certainly seems important to me... is it not meaningful to you?

How many people would have died anyway is not remotely meaningful to me. This isn't some mathematical thought experiment, situation A vs situation B. There's actually only what is happening now, and how many imaginary people may or may not have died of A,B or C is stupid, irrelevant and crass, frankly. You're basically armchair quarterbacking the apocalypse. Good job, dude.

[Swamp Chomp]

I'm hopeful this will usher in sweeping health insurance reform and maybe a single payer system.  Lots of people have been scoffing at it for years, but the shit is about to hit the fan and we are going to have bodies in the streets of major metropolitan areas.  There are going to be TONS of uninsured and underinsured people inundating the system, and when the dust settles a good portion of the debt incurred won't ever be repaid because people will be dead, or broke, or unemployed.  It's unconscionable that some people are going to get legitimately sick in the midst of pandemic/epidemic and can't seek medical care because they don't have insurance and are more worried about bankrupting themselves via medical care than dying.

Boooooooooo.  The government is the most inefficient consumer on the planet.  Doesn't matter what country it is.  Simple example: Look at the frugal decisions you made to get on your path to FI.  Sometimes they may have even been painful decisions but you benefitted directly as a result of making them and were, therefore, driven to make them.  The government can never make such decisions.  History is saturated with examples of this.  It is shocking when someone who has benefitted so immensely from what free-markets have made possible in the USA (i.e. being at or en route to financial independence) is so blind as to then prescribe something like this. 

A few resources for you that come to mind.  Good luck!

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUmcjbSHYq0
- https://www.prageru.com/video/the-truth-about-canadian-healthcare/
- https://reason.com/video/stossel-government-bans-ambulance-competition/
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E29LD98ruo

[Halfsees]

Probably not popular, but in some very specific cases, dying from this virus might significantly reduce suffering for the individual. For example, someone who is already dying, slowly and painfully, of cancer or some other terminal illness. If their suffering is cut from 6 months down to a few days for example. That's a silver lining. And if our society was better at dying with dignity in general it might not be the case, but we generally suck at it (and you don't even have to get into euthanasia, just doing hospice for someone vs subjecting them to chemo/radiation that can only make them sicker and miserable would be a massive improvement).

Funny, I thought something similar when the facility in Kirkland experienced multiple fatalities early on in this crisis. Specifically, there was a grieving woman quoted, and a picture of her with her 85 year old mother published. The mother was gripping a baby doll, probably indicating that she was suffering from some form of dementia. Having first-hand experience with same, my immediate thought was that at least the mother was spared the indignity of forgetting how to manage every facet of everyday life, including how to swallow and finally even how to breathe. While her death was certainly sad, it was not tragic. In some cases, hastening death is a tender mercy. If it was me in the same situation wiith no hope for recovery, I believe I'd opt for a fairly speedy demise rather than long, drawn out process.

As someone who in the last year pulled my father off of life support based on his living will and then watch him die of sepsis, I can appreciate all this. My father had a pretty terrible death, but it was weeks, not years, and he got to live on his own terms up to the point that he collapsed. I like to think his freedom was worth the price he paid. I don't support euthanasia because it seems too easy to abuse, but you do wish a swift death when you see people suffering.

I'm sorry for your loss, @sehr.  I went through this with an older friend. He tripped and fell, and somehow developed sepsis. He was terminally ill with something else, so he decided to yield to it instead of fight. I spent his last hours with him in the hospital and watched him pass in the wee hours of the night. A swift death looks more and more humane the older I get.

Thanks

[Freedomin5]

Back on topic...

I am currently enjoying staying at a four star hotel for a couple days courtesy of the Chinese government while China tests my throat swab for coronavirus.

If I test negative, I get to go back to my apartment for a two week mandatory quarantine during which time I fully intend to live life slowly, bake more, cook more, and enjoy my balcony more.

I’m definitely not minimizing the pandemic. I was in China when it first struck and left China at the height of the panic because my government was recommending evacuation, only to arrive in Canada and recently leave Canada at the height of the panic to return to work in China. I’ve gone through this twice now. If a second wave hits China, it will be three times.

Having lived through the experience twice now, I also know gratitude and optimism are great things to hold onto to counter the negativity, “the sky is falling” feeling, and the anxiety of the unknown.

[Ducknald Don]

Boooooooooo.  The government is the most inefficient consumer on the planet. 

I think you will find we get much better bang for the buck in the UK. Better life expectancy and lower costs.

[GuitarStv]

I'm hopeful this will usher in sweeping health insurance reform and maybe a single payer system.  Lots of people have been scoffing at it for years, but the shit is about to hit the fan and we are going to have bodies in the streets of major metropolitan areas.  There are going to be TONS of uninsured and underinsured people inundating the system, and when the dust settles a good portion of the debt incurred won't ever be repaid because people will be dead, or broke, or unemployed.  It's unconscionable that some people are going to get legitimately sick in the midst of pandemic/epidemic and can't seek medical care because they don't have insurance and are more worried about bankrupting themselves via medical care than dying.

Boooooooooo.  The government is the most inefficient consumer on the planet.  Doesn't matter what country it is.  Simple example: Look at the frugal decisions you made to get on your path to FI.  Sometimes they may have even been painful decisions but you benefitted directly as a result of making them and were, therefore, driven to make them.  The government can never make such decisions.  History is saturated with examples of this.  It is shocking when someone who has benefitted so immensely from what free-markets have made possible in the USA (i.e. being at or en route to financial independence) is so blind as to then prescribe something like this. 

A few resources for you that come to mind.  Good luck!

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUmcjbSHYq0
- https://www.prageru.com/video/the-truth-about-canadian-healthcare/
- https://reason.com/video/stossel-government-bans-ambulance-competition/
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E29LD98ruo

Government provided services in the US (or any country for that matter) are a large part of why it's possible to ER at all.

You probably keep your money in banks, right?  Banks that have federally mandated deposit insurance, that are regulated by the government.  Or maybe you have some nice things in your home.  Things that are protected from theft by the police.  Or maybe you used a public road to drive to work, or public education to learn enough to get a job.  If you've eaten at a restaurant or purchased food at a grocery store, you've benefited from regulations that keep food safe.  If you've breathed air, swum in water, or enjoyed nature you've benefited from environmental regulations that allowed you to do so.  Maybe you've benefited from the many programs that feed those less fortunate . . . reducing the need for them to resort to crime.  Maybe you've drunk tap water or had a fire department prevent your block from burning down by putting out a fire a few houses down.  If you're black, you've certainly benefited from government intervention that prevents white people from kidnapping you and using you as a slave anymore.

This list can go on and on.

There's nothing wrong with capitalism and free markets when they're tempered with government intervention.  But that government intervention is absolutely and unequivocally necessary for a functioning society.

[Sibley]

You know you're talking about people, right?

This kind of thought process is BS as far as I'm concerned. Who cares how many would have died?? Does that mean it's ok that they died of this? Because the end of this thought process is that it's ok to sacrifice x amount of people. Where does that leave you when those people are gone and the virus is still raging?

My point is to use math/statistics correctly and in context. You can use them to draw whatever conclusion you like.

12.4% of people aged 80-89 dying certainly seems important to me... is it not meaningful to you?

How many people would have died anyway is not remotely meaningful to me. This isn't some mathematical thought experiment, situation A vs situation B. There's actually only what is happening now, and how many imaginary people may or may not have died of A,B or C is stupid, irrelevant and crass, frankly. You're basically armchair quarterbacking the apocalypse. Good job, dude.

Anna, I understand why you're upset, but you need to back down here. Your brain processes differently than Ender's. My brain is somewhere between your's and Ender's. None of these are right, or wrong. They're just different. We all handle these events in our own way, and we all need to be able to respect that each of us is trying our best.

[Sibley]

I'm hopeful this will usher in sweeping health insurance reform and maybe a single payer system.  Lots of people have been scoffing at it for years, but the shit is about to hit the fan and we are going to have bodies in the streets of major metropolitan areas.  There are going to be TONS of uninsured and underinsured people inundating the system, and when the dust settles a good portion of the debt incurred won't ever be repaid because people will be dead, or broke, or unemployed.  It's unconscionable that some people are going to get legitimately sick in the midst of pandemic/epidemic and can't seek medical care because they don't have insurance and are more worried about bankrupting themselves via medical care than dying.

Boooooooooo.  The government is the most inefficient consumer on the planet.  Doesn't matter what country it is.  Simple example: Look at the frugal decisions you made to get on your path to FI.  Sometimes they may have even been painful decisions but you benefitted directly as a result of making them and were, therefore, driven to make them.  The government can never make such decisions.  History is saturated with examples of this.  It is shocking when someone who has benefitted so immensely from what free-markets have made possible in the USA (i.e. being at or en route to financial independence) is so blind as to then prescribe something like this. 

A few resources for you that come to mind.  Good luck!

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUmcjbSHYq0
- https://www.prageru.com/video/the-truth-about-canadian-healthcare/
- https://reason.com/video/stossel-government-bans-ambulance-competition/
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E29LD98ruo

Yes, there are cons to single payer systems. There are also pros. The world is now entering an experiment to find out which model is ultimately better at dealing with this kind of situation. Sometimes, you accept a certain amount of inefficiency because the pros outweigh the cons. We will have some pretty good evidence in a few months.

[Boofinator]

I have enjoyed the conversations about a bottom-up bail out instead of the top-down variety issued after 2008.  The crooks who got the country into the mortgage backed securities mess were deemed "too big to fail" and were given massive bailouts.  They took the money, handed out huge bonuses to each other (retention bonuses no less) and clapped themselves on the back for being so clever. 

Today I heard talk among smart people of spending the same amount, only giving it to the front line employees to assure they can hang on through this obviously transient situation, and CEOs are talking about a 50% pay cut through this time.  Way, way different than 10 years ago and damn refreshing.   

I'm just glad there's complaints about the airline industry wanting a bailout after spending so much on share buybacks.

The airlines will definitely be bailed out, and they need to be, but I hope that whatever it entails isn't a free pass.   Maybe debt for warrants or equity in the company or higher capital requirements going forward (like what was required for banks), a profit sharing/unemployment pool for employees, etc.

Great news on the bailout.  I mean, if we don't bailout the air industry . . . then we can't easily spread another pandemic by having people needlessly flying from place to place all the time.  That would be just terrible.  :P

Serious question...why do we need to bail out the airline industry?  Will the planes or airports evaporate if we allow the industry to go bankrupt?

Serious question here as well: If airlines spent most of their well-earned cash on stock buyouts during flush times, why can't they sell shares through an equity capital raise during tough times? Yes, it would suck for shareholders, but it wouldn't require a government bailout. Also, I agree with other commenters that executive officers should take a large financial hit as well (because that's how the dice roll).

[bigblock440]

I'm hopeful this will usher in sweeping health insurance reform and maybe a single payer system.  Lots of people have been scoffing at it for years, but the shit is about to hit the fan and we are going to have bodies in the streets of major metropolitan areas.  There are going to be TONS of uninsured and underinsured people inundating the system, and when the dust settles a good portion of the debt incurred won't ever be repaid because people will be dead, or broke, or unemployed.  It's unconscionable that some people are going to get legitimately sick in the midst of pandemic/epidemic and can't seek medical care because they don't have insurance and are more worried about bankrupting themselves via medical care than dying.

Boooooooooo.  The government is the most inefficient consumer on the planet.  Doesn't matter what country it is.  Simple example: Look at the frugal decisions you made to get on your path to FI.  Sometimes they may have even been painful decisions but you benefitted directly as a result of making them and were, therefore, driven to make them.  The government can never make such decisions.  History is saturated with examples of this.  It is shocking when someone who has benefitted so immensely from what free-markets have made possible in the USA (i.e. being at or en route to financial independence) is so blind as to then prescribe something like this. 

A few resources for you that come to mind.  Good luck!

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUmcjbSHYq0
- https://www.prageru.com/video/the-truth-about-canadian-healthcare/
- https://reason.com/video/stossel-government-bans-ambulance-competition/
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E29LD98ruo

Government provided services in the US (or any country for that matter) are a large part of why it's possible to ER at all.

You probably keep your money in banks, right?  Banks that have federally mandated deposit insurance, that are regulated by the government.  Or maybe you have some nice things in your home.  Things that are protected from theft by the police.  Or maybe you used a public road to drive to work, or public education to learn enough to get a job.  If you've eaten at a restaurant or purchased food at a grocery store, you've benefited from regulations that keep food safe.  If you've breathed air, swum in water, or enjoyed nature you've benefited from environmental regulations that allowed you to do so.  Maybe you've benefited from the many programs that feed those less fortunate . . . reducing the need for them to resort to crime.  Maybe you've drunk tap water or had a fire department prevent your block from burning down by putting out a fire a few houses down.  If you're black, you've certainly benefited from government intervention that prevents white people from kidnapping you and using you as a slave anymore.

This list can go on and on.

There's nothing wrong with capitalism and free markets when they're tempered with government intervention.  But that government intervention is absolutely and unequivocally necessary for a functioning society.

What does any of that have to do with the government being a consumer?  Government placing regulations on things is not the government consuming things (though it is often forcing other entities to consume things, it is not doing it itself).

[former player]

Yes, there are cons to single payer systems. There are also pros. The world is now entering an experiment to find out which model is ultimately better at dealing with this kind of situation. Sometimes, you accept a certain amount of inefficiency because the pros outweigh the cons. We will have some pretty good evidence in a few months.

I suspect that for covid-19 patients what the USA effectively has, now and for the foreseeable future, is a national health service paid for by the federal government.  All that will tell you is that the patchwork, inefficient, neither one nor the other insurance system that the USA has isn't good enough to cope with this pandemic.

[jjandjab]

I have enjoyed the conversations about a bottom-up bail out instead of the top-down variety issued after 2008.  The crooks who got the country into the mortgage backed securities mess were deemed "too big to fail" and were given massive bailouts.  They took the money, handed out huge bonuses to each other (retention bonuses no less) and clapped themselves on the back for being so clever. 

Today I heard talk among smart people of spending the same amount, only giving it to the front line employees to assure they can hang on through this obviously transient situation, and CEOs are talking about a 50% pay cut through this time.  Way, way different than 10 years ago and damn refreshing.   

I'm just glad there's complaints about the airline industry wanting a bailout after spending so much on share buybacks.

The airlines will definitely be bailed out, and they need to be, but I hope that whatever it entails isn't a free pass.   Maybe debt for warrants or equity in the company or higher capital requirements going forward (like what was required for banks), a profit sharing/unemployment pool for employees, etc.

Great news on the bailout.  I mean, if we don't bailout the air industry . . . then we can't easily spread another pandemic by having people needlessly flying from place to place all the time.  That would be just terrible.  :P

Serious question...why do we need to bail out the airline industry?  Will the planes or airports evaporate if we allow the industry to go bankrupt?

Serious question here as well: If airlines spent most of their well-earned cash on stock buyouts during flush times, why can't they sell shares through an equity capital raise during tough times? Yes, it would suck for shareholders, but it wouldn't require a government bailout. Also, I agree with other commenters that executive officers should take a large financial hit as well (because that's how the dice roll).

I think that it is kinda/sorta wrong to call it a bailout, at least using the loaded connotation that derives from 2008. I think the difference is back then the bailout was going directly to the firms/companies that created the entire mess in the first place through their unending greed. Their CDOs and subprime mortgages took everyone down and they got money to help deal with it and survive.

In this case, the airlines might have been profitable and doing shake buybacks (which I personally don't like), but they did not create this almost unimaginable dead stop in airline traffic. Sure, we all should have emergency funds, but just like the mom and pop restaurant down the street, I don't want to see them crater from a simple lack of cash flow and have to start from scratch if this is something that might be terrible for 6-8 weeks but can then turn around quickly. Airlines support a robust modern economy and letting them fail completely just seems like a really bad idea to me.

It seems that if people wouldn't support a corporate "bailout" then they shouldn't support any individual taxpayer stimulus payments either.

[MilesTeg]

I have enjoyed the conversations about a bottom-up bail out instead of the top-down variety issued after 2008.  The crooks who got the country into the mortgage backed securities mess were deemed "too big to fail" and were given massive bailouts.  They took the money, handed out huge bonuses to each other (retention bonuses no less) and clapped themselves on the back for being so clever. 

Today I heard talk among smart people of spending the same amount, only giving it to the front line employees to assure they can hang on through this obviously transient situation, and CEOs are talking about a 50% pay cut through this time.  Way, way different than 10 years ago and damn refreshing.   

I'm just glad there's complaints about the airline industry wanting a bailout after spending so much on share buybacks.

The airlines will definitely be bailed out, and they need to be, but I hope that whatever it entails isn't a free pass.   Maybe debt for warrants or equity in the company or higher capital requirements going forward (like what was required for banks), a profit sharing/unemployment pool for employees, etc.

Great news on the bailout.  I mean, if we don't bailout the air industry . . . then we can't easily spread another pandemic by having people needlessly flying from place to place all the time.  That would be just terrible.  :P

Serious question...why do we need to bail out the airline industry?  Will the planes or airports evaporate if we allow the industry to go bankrupt?

Serious question here as well: If airlines spent most of their well-earned cash on stock buyouts during flush times, why can't they sell shares through an equity capital raise during tough times? Yes, it would suck for shareholders, but it wouldn't require a government bailout. Also, I agree with other commenters that executive officers should take a large financial hit as well (because that's how the dice roll).

I think that it is kinda/sorta wrong to call it a bailout, at least using the loaded connotation that derives from 2008. I think the difference is back then the bailout was going directly to the firms/companies that created the entire mess in the first place through their unending greed. Their CDOs and subprime mortgages took everyone down and they got money to help deal with it and survive.

In this case, the airlines might have been profitable and doing shake buybacks (which I personally don't like), but they did not create this almost unimaginable dead stop in airline traffic. Sure, we all should have emergency funds, but just like the mom and pop restaurant down the street, I don't want to see them crater from a simple lack of cash flow and have to start from scratch if this is something that might be terrible for 6-8 weeks but can then turn around quickly. Airlines support a robust modern economy and letting them fail completely just seems like a really bad idea to me.

It seems that if people wouldn't support a corporate "bailout" then they shouldn't support any individual taxpayer stimulus payments either.

The huge difference is that mega corps have a lot more opportunity to build "rainy day" funds than your typical small business, which generally runs on a razor thin margin at best.

If you are a corp that just blew your rainy day fund on stock buybacks to pump up share price (or any similar lack of planning) and are now high and dry? You deserve to fail and your controlling shareholders deserve to lose everything.

What should happen is these failed companies (the ones that perform a vital service) should be allowed to go bankrupt, nationalized and sold to the highest bidder THEN given financial support to get that vital service running again. Or some variation of this.

What should NOT happen is letting the same idiots not suffer the consequences of their idiocy. It just perpetuates the problem.

[DadJokes]

Here's a nice silver lining:

I've spent more time outside in the last two weeks that I have since having a child. People all over our neighborhood are going for walks; families are putting stuffed animals in windows to make our neighborhood something of a zoo for walkers to spot; and I've gotten to know a lot of neighbors (albeit over Facebook) since this ordeal began.

[Holocene]

People all over our neighborhood are going for walks

I was gonna say the same thing.  If nothing else, this is getting people outside.  I'm sure the spring weather is helping too.  But I've never seen so many people out walking, running, biking, and rollerblading in my neighborhood (generally observing safe distances from each other thankfully).  It almost annoys me a little bit since I'm used to having streets and paths mostly to myself and now I have to slow down more on my bike.  But I do think it's a good thing so I'm trying not to be selfish!  I've also seen a bunch of uplifting sayings written in chalk on driveways, streets, and paths.  Things like, "We'll get through this" and "Stay strong."  It's nice to see a bit of positivity when things are otherwise looking somewhat bleak.

Also, some musicians are playing from their houses on youtube or instagram live.  One artist I really like has been playing a song every day and a longer show every week.  It's just a nice way to feel a little more connected in such an isolating time.

[AnswerIs42]

It is possible/probable that flu and colds will occur less because the precautions that reduce the number of people with colds and flu are the same as the ones being undertaken for the coronavirus.

That's one thing I'm happy for. I've had non-stop colds since the end of December, and I'm completely fed up with them. Once I've recovered it'll be nice to have some time feeling human again, assuming no Covid19 of course :O

[OtherJen]

People all over our neighborhood are going for walks

I was gonna say the same thing.  If nothing else, this is getting people outside.  I'm sure the spring weather is helping too.  But I've never seen so many people out walking, running, biking, and rollerblading in my neighborhood (generally observing safe distances from each other thankfully).  It almost annoys me a little bit since I'm used to having streets and paths mostly to myself and now I have to slow down more on my bike.  But I do think it's a good thing so I'm trying not to be selfish!  I've also seen a bunch of uplifting sayings written in chalk on driveways, streets, and paths.  Things like, "We'll get through this" and "Stay strong."  It's nice to see a bit of positivity when things are otherwise looking somewhat bleak.

Also, some musicians are playing from their houses on youtube or instagram live.  One artist I really like has been playing a song every day and a longer show every week.  It's just a nice way to feel a little more connected in such an isolating time.

A couple of my friends have left those chalk messages throughout their neighborhood. I love the idea.

Instagram is really fun right now. I'm a huge Queen fan, and Brian May has been playing mini-concerts, while Roger Taylor is doing videos on drum fundamentals. Also, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge posted an adorable video of their kids cheering the medical workers today, and there are so many cute cats.

[SpaceCow]

Hopefully when things return to normal, people will still remember to give others plenty of personal space. All of my life I have been annoyed by people standing too close behind me in line at stores, talking too closely, and generally not respecting personal space. The pandemic may finally make that behavior socially reprehensible.

[Luz]

We're one of those low income families facing job loss... and I feel surprisingly optimistic. I read recently about how people coped during the Great Depression. Obviously there was plenty of suffering for those with economic woes, but that wasn't the whole picture. To survive, people had to be thrifty, resourceful, and flexible. They also had to rely on others more and practice more contentment. It's been a wake up call to realize that much of what I've taken for granted is not a given. It's changed my perspective in so many ways and I can be grateful for that.

As far as the macro silver linings: my guess is we'll likely see a mixed bag. Some positive changes, some not so positive, and some things staying the same.

On the personal end: I found out that my husband is an incredible cook! We've been married 5 years and he always said he didn't know how to cook. I assumed he was a worse cook than I (and I'm not that great). But he started making a few dishes from his native Mexico while on social distancing leave from work, and oh my god, he's amazing (even with no prior experience)! The ingredients (salsas made from chiles, tomatoes, onion, cilantro and garlic over rice, beans and a bit of meat or chicken with tortillas) are much cheaper, which is awesome because we slashed our food budget in half. I'm looking at a lifetime (hopefully) of eating healthy, cheap, delicious food that I don't have to prepare. I can't believe my luck! I always said that he would be the perfect partner if he just knew how to cook. And just like that, he has become the perfect partner!

[Buffaloski Boris]

Some good things:

I’ve noticed more people out walking and biking. Like a factor of 3X. I like seeing people out and about improving their health.

The Commonthievery of Virginia, in a stunning act of common sense, is allowing restaurants to serve mixed drinks to go.

Less traffic.

Neighbors being much more friendly.

I’m getting a lot more sleep. Seems like most folks are as well.

My crazy dog is benefitting from the time spent at home.

No waiting at the dog-wash.

Shopping is greatly more efficient.  Lots of options for curbside pickup.  Since the emphasis is on "get your ___ and go" there is a lot more emphasis on one trip every week or two and making do.

Animal shelters are emptying out  The animals are getting homes.

Home schooling is getting less wretched with time.

 

[Linea_Norway]

Hopefully when things return to normal, people will still remember to give others plenty of personal space. All of my life I have been annoyed by people standing too close behind me in line at stores, talking too closely, and generally not respecting personal space. The pandemic may finally make that behavior socially reprehensible.

And hopefully they will develop better sneezing habits. I haven experienced so often that when passing a person coming towards me on a narrow sidewalk, that the person sneezes or coughs without holding anything in front of their mouth. It has always disgusted me to be sprayed with whatever viruses that person may be carrying.

[LWYRUP]

This weekend I was driving back from my parents house (both sets of families are self-isolating so we decided to create a little larger family group bubble) and as I was driving along, listening to an old Bob Marley CD, it occurred to me that there were a ton people out on bikes and walking with their families and the mall and 90% of the restaurants were closed.  It felt very wholesome.  I have long since been a believer in "blue laws" and wish every Sunday was like this. 

I also have deliberately spent more time with my kids and less time working (still clocking 40 hours, just not doing more) to help my wife (SAHM) deal with having kids home all day.  Two days in a row I've taken a break during work hours to help teach my daughter to ride her bike.  The one today was while my wife had a video conference with a doctor for the baby, and the conflict got me out of a totally pointless mandatory staff meeting where all I was going to do is try as best as I could to ignore the useless chatter and work on e-mails (only marginally more useful) instead.  Keeping that chatter out of my mind is going to make me more productive for the rest of the day as I actually get stuff done. 

[FiveSigmas]

I’ve noticed more people out walking and biking. Like a factor of 3X. I like seeing people out and about improving their health.

This is even being witnessed in economic terms. Bike sales in many places are apparently through the roof.

Also, my hometown just announced that a couple hundred twenty additional miles of roadway will be permanently converted to bike/walk-space.

I’ll take any small pieces of good news where I can get them.

Edit: Order of magnitude correction. :-/

[John Galt incarnate!]

And hopefully they will develop better sneezing habits. I haven experienced so often that when passing a person coming towards me on a narrow sidewalk, that the person sneezes or coughs without holding anything in front of their mouth. It has always disgusted me to be sprayed with whatever viruses that person may be carrying.

A few  weeks ago as  I entered the grocery store a masked woman coughed while she stood by the door.

Though I was wearing   a mask I recoiled and raised my arm to my face for additional protection.

The woman said "Don't worry, I only cough when I'm hungry."

[the_fixer]

I’ve noticed more people out walking and biking. Like a factor of 3X. I like seeing people out and about improving their health.

This is even being witnessed in economic terms. Bike sales in many places are apparently through the roof.

Also, my hometown just announced that a couple hundred additional miles of roadway will be permanently converted to bike/walk-space.

I’ll take any small pieces of good news where I can get them.

I have been saving up for an ebike and with covid figured they could use the business so I would support the local bike shop and purchase it there vs my normal bike shop a couple towns away.


Let just say they were not hurting for business, when I went to pickup the bike there was 15 - 20 people waiting to get service or buy parts :o

The owner said it has been like that the entire time so hopefully they will thrive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buffaloski Boris]

I was out biking today and there were a LOT of people on the trail.  More than I've ever seen.  So maybe/hopefully this is a trend that'll stick. 

[Shane]

Back on topic...

I am currently enjoying staying at a four star hotel for a couple days courtesy of the Chinese government while China tests my throat swab for coronavirus.

If I test negative, I get to go back to my apartment for a two week mandatory quarantine during which time I fully intend to live life slowly, bake more, cook more, and enjoy my balcony more.

I’m definitely not minimizing the pandemic. I was in China when it first struck and left China at the height of the panic because my government was recommending evacuation, only to arrive in Canada and recently leave Canada at the height of the panic to return to work in China. I’ve gone through this twice now. If a second wave hits China, it will be three times.

Having lived through the experience twice now, I also know gratitude and optimism are great things to hold onto to counter the negativity, “the sky is falling” feeling, and the anxiety of the unknown.

Wait...what? You've got an oven in your apartment in China?

[Shane]

I'm hopeful this will usher in sweeping health insurance reform and maybe a single payer system.  Lots of people have been scoffing at it for years, but the shit is about to hit the fan and we are going to have bodies in the streets of major metropolitan areas.  There are going to be TONS of uninsured and underinsured people inundating the system, and when the dust settles a good portion of the debt incurred won't ever be repaid because people will be dead, or broke, or unemployed.  It's unconscionable that some people are going to get legitimately sick in the midst of pandemic/epidemic and can't seek medical care because they don't have insurance and are more worried about bankrupting themselves via medical care than dying.

Boooooooooo.  The government is the most inefficient consumer on the planet.  Doesn't matter what country it is.  Simple example: Look at the frugal decisions you made to get on your path to FI.  Sometimes they may have even been painful decisions but you benefitted directly as a result of making them and were, therefore, driven to make them.  The government can never make such decisions.  History is saturated with examples of this.  It is shocking when someone who has benefitted so immensely from what free-markets have made possible in the USA (i.e. being at or en route to financial independence) is so blind as to then prescribe something like this. 

A few resources for you that come to mind.  Good luck!

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUmcjbSHYq0
- https://www.prageru.com/video/the-truth-about-canadian-healthcare/
- https://reason.com/video/stossel-government-bans-ambulance-competition/
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E29LD98ruo

Wonder why it is then that the US spends roughly twice as much on healthcare as every other major country in the world?