[evan_au]

It seems from today's news that President Trump is keen to get America back to business after Easter (12 April, this year).
- From his political background, maybe he favours big business, and is alarmed by the loss of profits from the current shutdowns?
- Given the large number of people who are currently infected in the community, a return to work will produce an explosion of cases 5-10 days later
- Hospital ventilators could be 100% used by mid-April
- Turning a major exposition venue in New York into a military field hospital is a good idea, but this needs to be repeated around the country

1. If the pandemic is spread out over 4 months through various shutdowns and social distancing mechanisms, then society can limp on, with 25% of critical workers off work at any time
- There should be enough non-infective workers to deliver food, treat medical conditions and repair electricity & water networks

2. However, if you ignore any such measures, you could have most people infected in the same month
- There will be no medical care, food deliveries and failures of critical networks will go unrepaired
- That is likely to cause riots, which will have major costs to the economy
- A lot of older/more experienced workers and managers will die, losing valuable intellectual capital

3. Or you could just encourage infected workers to keep working despite actively shedding virus - that will cause it to spread extremely rapidly.

Which option will cost the economy more?

[Petrochemicals]

Evan, anyone over 60 should stay at home, social distance, take precautions for 12 weeks, by such time the virus will have peaked and fallen, few people will still have it, herd immunity etc. They need the populace at large to be immune, if one in ten people have the virus at any time (month long infection remember) it will spread pretty much the same, look at measles ! A vast generalisation I know, but this stay at home policy does not make sense.

[evan_au]

anyone over 60 should stay at home, social distance, take precautions for 12 weeks, by such time the virus will have peaked and fallen, few people will still have it, herd immunity etc.

- The predictions I have seen for UK/USA indeed suggest that rates should fall after 12 weeks - if people follow social distancing.
- But the virus will continue to circulate amongst uninfected individuals - only a small number will have recovered and be immune.
- And it will explode when winter months appear, and virus transmission increases.
- Only after the disaster of many people being denied treatment due to lack of hospital beds will there be enough herd immunity to protect older people. They will probably need to wait for a vaccine, or some more effective treatments than we have at present.

See Figure 3 at: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

[Petrochemicals]

anyone over 60 should stay at home, social distance, take precautions for 12 weeks, by such time the virus will have peaked and fallen, few people will still have it, herd immunity etc.

- The predictions I have seen for UK/USA indeed suggest that rates should fall after 12 weeks - if people follow social distancing.
- But the virus will continue to circulate amongst uninfected individuals - only a small number will have recovered and be immune.
- And it will explode when winter months appear, and virus transmission increases.
- Only after the disaster of many people being denied treatment due to lack of hospital beds will there be enough herd immunity to protect older people. They will probably need to wait for a vaccine, or some more effective treatments than we have at present.

See Figure 3 at: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

I doubt that, if allowed to circulater freely, we would see the exponential rise that people are quoting, but i agree about the summer winter, time is running out for us this winter to develop herd immunity.

[evan_au]

the exponential rise that people are quoting

The thing about exponential increases is that they rapidly exceed any limit you try to put on them.

In this case, the ultimate limit for cases of COVID-19 is the world population (approaching 8 billion of us).

So the exponential growth gets curtailed by some limits in the system, often forming a logistic function for the number of affected individuals.
- An initial exponential explosion eventually turns into a negative exponential creep.
- If you look at the number of new cases per day or per week, this is related to the slope of the logistic function, and often forms a bell-shaped curve.
- It is the height of this bell-shaped curve that we need to reduce, if we are to be able to treat all of the severe cases in our hospitals

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function

[alancalverd (OP)]

I doubt that, if allowed to circulater freely, we would see the exponential rise

If you circulate freely among strangers, you will infect people at random. If you infect x new people each day, and they do likewise, after n days you will have infected xⁿ people. How is that not exponential?

Compared with common or garden flu, the problem with COVID is threefold: the high infectivity of asymptomatic or presymptomatic carriers (x>2, n>5), the high incidence of mild symptoms (infective people "carrying on as usual"),  and the high mortality rate (2 - 4% with full treatment, possibly > 10% without).

[Bored chemist]

I doubt that, if allowed to circulater freely, we would see the exponential rise that people are quoting,

That may well be right for the wrong reason.
This graph is on a log/ lin scale. so an exponential growth gives a straight line.
Eventually, the bug runs out of victims so exponential growth can't carry on forever but apart from China and S Korea, everyone is actually showing exponential growth.
It's not a case of "we would see" but "we are already seeing"

corona graph.png (162.97 kB . 510x293 - viewed 16977 times)

[alancalverd (OP)]

The graphs pretty well confirm the obvious. Early growth is exponential unless and until the authorities prevent free movement, and the curve will eventually turn over when there are more infected or immune survivors than uninfected virgins.

It would be interesting to normalise the number of cases by population. Do  you have any raw data?

[Bored chemist]

Yep. The initial growth is almost bound to be practically exponential.

Do  you have any raw data?

No. That clip is from the Financial Times. They might cite the original data.

[evan_au]

That clip is from the Financial Times.

Thanks for posting the graph & explanation.

There is a saying "A week is a long time in Politics."
We can now add "A week is a long time in Pandemics."

When posting graphs like that, a date would also be helpful, as it will be well and truly obsolete a week later...

[alancalverd (OP)]

Good explanation of the Korean figures on Channel 4 news tonight. They cited massive testing and exceptional public compliance (though one clip showed metro passengers queueing as densely as any in the UK) . What isn't clear is how they managed to produce a useful test, manufacture it on the required scale, and mobilise not only testing staff but also temporary offsite test booths, on a very short timescale. Powerful use of all available tracking data too: central tracking of credit card transactions of any confirmed carriers led to focussed testing and isolation. Just shows that if you put public safety before all else, you can indeed protect the public.

Meanwhile the UK creaks into some semblance of action. An antibody test demonstrated on TV last week has been sort-of-ordered subject to the usual grinding of gears over Medical Device certification, likewise production of ventilators, and the police, not wearing PPE, stick their heads into people's cars or stop solo motorbikes and issue spot fines for any journey they consider inessential, as if there was a fuel shortage too. An old skeptic might ask how anyone sitting in a car or wearing a full face helmet and leather gloves can possibly  infect anyone (apart from said police officer). Plus a public information film shaming someone for walking his dog about a thousand yards from any other sign of human presence - is COVID transmissible to rabbits? So plenty of posturing here.

Anyway I'm pleased that the Chancellor has taken up my suggestion of a tax rebate for the self-employed.

[pensador]

If people continue to work from home after the Pandemic, it could have great benefits for pollution. It might even help global warming to slow down a bit.

If there is a global financial collapse due to this pandemic, a new economic model could be introduced. Trekonomics might even catch on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trekonomics

If the majority of the elderly die of in the epidemic, the worlds politics might change to a more liberal view point. ie the older people get the more to the right they tend to go, younger people are more optimistic and want change. Old folks generally resist change with the NIMBY attitude

[alancalverd (OP)]

the older people get the more to the right they tend to go, younger people are more optimistic and want change. Old folks generally resist change with the NIMBY attitude

Don't you believe it! The older we get, the more sceptical of those in office and authority. How many pensioners are gulled into joining the most reactionary islamist cults? Middle-aged goths populating self-harm websites? I think not.

[jeffreyH]

Good explanation of the Korean figures on Channel 4 news tonight. They cited massive testing and exceptional public compliance (though one clip showed metro passengers queueing as densely as any in the UK) . What isn't clear is how they managed to produce a useful test, manufacture it on the required scale, and mobilise not only testing staff but also temporary offsite test booths, on a very short timescale. Powerful use of all available tracking data too: central tracking of credit card transactions of any confirmed carriers led to focussed testing and isolation. Just shows that if you put public safety before all else, you can indeed protect the public.

Meanwhile the UK creaks into some semblance of action. An antibody test demonstrated on TV last week has been sort-of-ordered subject to the usual grinding of gears over Medical Device certification, likewise production of ventilators, and the police, not wearing PPE, stick their heads into people's cars or stop solo motorbikes and issue spot fines for any journey they consider inessential, as if there was a fuel shortage too. An old skeptic might ask how anyone sitting in a car or wearing a full face helmet and leather gloves can possibly  infect anyone (apart from said police officer). Plus a public information film shaming someone for walking his dog about a thousand yards from any other sign of human presence - is COVID transmissible to rabbits? So plenty of posturing here.

Anyway I'm pleased that the Chancellor has taken up my suggestion of a tax rebate for the self-employed.

Oh that's just the start of creeping authoritarianism. This is the perfect time for a trial run. Whatever they can get away with now they can also attempt in the next crisis. Only next time it'll be more severe. Fines are a good way of topping up the slush fund for the sociopathic classes.

[evan_au]

What isn't clear is how [South Korea] managed to produce a useful test, manufacture it on the required scale, and mobilise not only testing staff but also temporary offsite test booths, on a very short timescale.

I understand that South Korea was severely affected by the 2018 outbreak of MERS (a different coronavirus, apparently derived from Egyptian tomb bats, and conveyed into the human population via camels).

As a result of that 2018 outbreak, the South Korean government introduced policies to stockpile reagents and test equipment, which were able to be rapidly applied for this new coronavirus outbreak.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East_respiratory_syndrome

[evan_au]

Time for a new economics?

It's time for us to think about what is really important - even a 0.5% to 1% chance of death in the next 2 weeks makes you reevaluate your priorities!

[evan_au]

At present, production & distribution of food will be slightly impaired, due to a fraction of the people directly involved being sick or in isolation
- But soon, production and distribution will become more significantly impacted because of indirect effects - you can't:
- Produce the food because the water pump is broken and the electrician is not considered "critical"
- Or deliver the food because the truck is broken, and the mechanic or the spare parts warehouse is not regarded as "critical".
- Or sell the food because the barcode scanner technician is not regarded as "critical"

One unfortunate side-effect of people trying to keep 2 weeks of supplies in their homes is an increase in food waste.
- More food will spoil and be discarded, compared to people who buy only a few days food at a time.
- That is not helpful, at a time of potential shortages.

[evan_au]

Time for a new economics?

Donald Trump orders Ford & GM to make ventilators, using powers reserved for wartime...

The USA is more addicted to cars than most countries. Perhaps this shows that breathing is more important than driving?

Of course, a car production line optimized for gas-guzzlers is not really suited to producing compact medical devices acting as gas injectors - but amazing things can happen in wartime...

See: https://www.bbc.com/news/52071611

[hamdani yusuf]

The pandemic forces us to prioritize our needs. Some non-essentials may be sacrificed to fulfill the essentials. We are facing a real world troley problem. Poor people who got locked down lose their income. Some say they will die from starvation before getting infected by the virus.
Some office workers can work from home. It tells us that their jobs are mostly involving data processing, which can someday be replaced by AI. Surgery can already be done remotely, which makes it prone to be replaced by AI. Food delivery can be done by drones. It also tells us that a lot of transportation spendings are superfluous, in addition to lost of productive time in traffic jam, pollution from combustion engines and infrastructure construction involving concrete and steel. The future will show us benefits from localizing resources, such as domestic solar cells, vertical farming, 3D printing for household utensils, etc.
Most stock transactions are done by AI. Richest people get their income mostly due to their share in stocks instead of their tangible services to society. So basically they can be readily replaced by AI. Some rich people are known to have sold some of their stock just before the price plunged. It may be because they have made insider trading, but it can also only means that they have used a good AI to manage their stock transactions.

[alancalverd (OP)]

Of course, a car production line optimized for gas-guzzlers is not really suited to producing compact medical devices acting as gas injectors - but amazing things can happen in wartime...

And just when they had got the hang of high pressure fuel injection, they get an order for low pressure carburettors!

Meanwhile, back to government economics. Now the UK at least has introduced tax rebates and government-financed basic incomes, perhaps it's time to consider an idea I've been playing with for a few years.

1. Get rid of all avoidable taxes such as income tax and corporation tax. Sensible and well-paid people don't pay any of these anyway - you are employed at a miserable salary by an offshore company that contracts to supply your services at huge expense, then invests the tax-free surplus in your retirement fund, your children's education, and the yacht or island that you can "borrow" from time to time.

2. Then increase an unavoidable tax - VAT - to cover the loss, and charge it on all imports including services.

3. Now give every adult something around £5000 per year to offset the VAT on personal survival essentials like fuel.

The beauty is that offshore and multinational companies cannot reduce their tax liability by claiming negligible profit on their franchised UK operations: every transaction within the UK incurs a 40% government levy, like it or lump it, and a government that gives every adult £100 per week simply for being British, is going to be very popular.