Saturday, March 21, 2020
There's no doubt
Americans over
65 years old,
with underlying
health conditions,
need to be isolated
from COVID-19 flu.
I'm in that category,
so I would be avoiding
bars, restaurants
and movie theaters,
even if they were
open for business.
My wife thinks
I'm taking too many
risks when buying
a $2 McDouble
hamburger at a
local MacDonald's
drive through.
But I need to get
out of the house,
even if just for
a short drive.
How much damage
to our economy
makes sense,
to (hopefully) save
an unknown
number of lives?
Experience in
the Seattle area,
the first area
hit by COVID-19,
suggests a two
week "shutdown"
has had little effect.
Is a government
mandated shutdown
of a large portion
of the entire
U.S. economy,
for OVER
two weeks,
a smart move ?
Not in my opinion,
based on data,
rather than on
wild guess virus
scaremongering.
In a typical year,
30,000 to 40,000
flu-related deaths
are to be expected
in the U.S.
1,000 flu deaths
a week would not
be unusual in the
winter months.
In the U.S., in the two
months since the
first COVID-19 death
on January 20, 2020,
we are approaching
only 300 COVID-19
related deaths.
Far fewer deaths than
all other strains of flu.
The total number of
COVID-19 infections
is unknown, because
so few people have
been tested.
The people who
have been tested
tend to be those with
serious symptoms.
Their death rate
seems to be
at least 4%.
That's VERY high,
until you consider
that only about 20%
of COVID-19 carriers
will ever get
serious symptoms
which would justify
hospitalization, and
COVID-19 testing .
Multiply
the two numbers,
and a reasonable
estimate is
a 1% death rate,
for all COVID-19
infections.
That's five to ten
times higher than
typical, common
flu viruses, but
but let's not forget
that means 99%
of COVID-19 carriers
are expected to survive.
A partial economic
shutdown, causing
an instant recession,
hurts over ten million
people.
And that seems like
an overreaction
to (hopefully) save
hundreds of lives --
mainly older people
who have serious,
existing medical
conditions.
I fit into that category,
so I'm not biased
against older people !
Unintended good news:
Deaths from other
strains of influenza
will also be reduced
by "social distancing"
for COVID-19.
And there are
far more deaths,
every year, from
all other types of flu,
compared with
COVID-19 deaths.
Yet no government
has ever been
interested in
those deaths !
Looking at
other nations:
China shut down
economic activity
in the Wuhan area,
but not all of China.
They claim no new
COVID 19 cases,
but the Chinese
are notorious liars!
Korea did a lot
of testing, and
quickly isolated
those people
who had the
coronavirus.
Singapore and Hong
Kong did not shut
down their economies,
yet have not suffered.
Northern Italy, where
lots of Chinese people
work, and where residents
often ignore government
mandates, was hit hard.
Southern Italy was not.
I have noticed that
climates significantly
colder, or warmer,
than Wuhan, China,
seem to have been
less affected.
And males
seem to be
dying much
more often
than females.
There are a lot of
questions, and
very few answers.
More U.S.
retail stores
are announcing
they are closing.
Sometimes they say
"until the end of March",
or "for two weeks",
or the reopening date
is not specified.
Even two weeks closed
would be bad news
for laid off employees.
Two weeks closed
has the goal
( hopefully )
of reducing the feared
hospital overcrowding.
That does make sense
in New York City,
which has been
hit hard.
And in Northern Italy.
But what happens
after two weeks ?
COVID-19
will not disappear
after just two weeks
of "social distancing".
And will most people
be willing to go
back to retail stores,
bars and restaurants
AFTER two weeks,
assuming they are
allowed to open ?
I'd go to a restaurant
if they allowed every
other table to be empty,
so I didn't have to sit
next to strangers.
But I doubt if my wife
would be willing
to join me.
Investors don't know
how long government
mandates halting
economic activity
will last,
nor do they know
if people will fear
being near other
people AFTER the
businesses reopen.
That sounds like
good news for
Amazon online sales !
Investor uncertainty
about when this
unprecedented
shutdown of
commerce will
end, reduces their
confidence.
Rising stock prices
always climb a ladder
of growing confidence.
At the moment it's
not obvious confidence
has stopped falling.
Retail stores, bars and
restaurants, combined,
employ a lot of people,
who can't expect
to get paid when
they are not working.
I would guess most
of those employees
live from paycheck
to paycheck.
Most U.S. workers do.
In fact, 78% of
American workers
said they were living
paycheck to paycheck,
according to a 2017
report by the employment
website CareerBuilder.
Women are most vulnerable:
81% of them report living
paycheck to paycheck,
compared with 75% of men.
When you live from
paycheck to paycheck,
you are just one
major disaster away
from financial ruin.
If somebody
in your family
loses their job,
or has a significant
medical emergency,
you may not be able
to pay all your bills.
From the same survey:
More than 70%
of all respondents
say they are in debt,
and
one quarter of workers
say they weren’t able
to make ends meet
at the end of every month
during the past year.
People with no savings
are very vulnerable
to financial emergencies.
And that is where
many Americans,
who are paid by the hour
find themselves today,
after their employers
closed for COVID-19.
And many small
business owners
are suffering too.
$1,000 government
checks ( "free money"
for every American )
will not bail out
the $20 trillion
U.S. economy,
when up to 20%
of all employees
are being told
to stay home !
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.