Corona death rate in US worse than Iran's

[UsualName]

Here’s what the on the ground out of control numbers by age look like in Italy:

We’re about 10 days behind Italy and most accounts on the same trajectory, especially in Washington state.

We have, however, begun mitigation efforts at the state level (in some states) ahead of Italy but without tracking and testing it’s really a crap shoot for us.

This next week will be very telling.

 

[Cuddles]

IRAN
514/11364 4.52%

USA
50/2291 2.18%

Iran's death rate surpassed the USA's in post 102

 

[Cuddles]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1238232319456153604

poison pills, how do they work?
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/...n-abortion-restrictions?utm_source=reddit.com

Looks like we're on our way to follow on Italy's footsteps.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Here’s what the on the ground out of control numbers by age look like in Italy:

View attachment 222110

We’re about 10 days behind Italy and most accounts on the same trajectory, especially in Washington state.

We have, however, begun mitigation efforts at the state level (in some states) ahead of Italy but without tracking and testing it’s really a crap shoot for us.

This next week will be very telling.

Everyone likes to post the stat's and numbers, except for this one. What percent of the population will die? In America the most level headed, non tinfoil cap wearing estimates run around 500,000 tops. We have what, 320,000,000 in the country. 500,000/320,000,000 =.0015625%.
Now I understand that we're trying to spread this out over several months rather than a couple, but the real deal, cut through all the shit question is, are will willing to risk an economic catastrophe which will impact tens of millions over several years trying to slow this down, in the end not really saving anyone who wasn't going to die from this anyway, most very elderly and sickly, and comprising what is a statistical rounding error of the population? I'm not saying we should or shouldn't, but this single question will become more prevalent moving forward as the pain of the current solutions being implemented become seemingly more destructive than the disease itself.
And before the pearl clutching outrage begins, I'm 68 with a mild heart condition which puts me somewhat in that high risk category. I don't think the country should be destroyed in an attempt to save me, especially considering I have by all sane and rational estimates a minimum 97% chance of just being really fucking sick for a week and surviving.

 

[Cuddles]

.... are will willing to risk an economic catastrophe which will impact tens of millions over several years trying to slow this down, in the end not really saving anyone who wasn't going to die from this anyway, most very elderly and sickly, and comprising what is a statistical rounding error of the population? I'm not saying we should or shouldn't, but this single question will become more prevalent moving forward as the pain of the current solutions being implemented become seemingly more destructive than the disease itself.
And before the pearl clutching outrage begins, I'm 68 with a mild heart condition which puts me somewhat in that high risk category. I don't think the country should be destroyed in an attempt to save me, especially considering I have by all sane and rational estimates a minimum 97% chance of just being really fucking sick for a week and surviving.

I mean, we did over 2k dead Americans when the towers came down....with trumpets and bluster I might add.

 

[smallfil]

Communist China with 2 billion people who hid the number of actual fatalities. How much do they claim died? They claim over 3,000? The figure could be closer to 10,000 or more considering the communists love to hide negative news. Also, they put huge incinerators in Wuhan, China, all 10 of them for what purpose? Maybe, to immediately, burn all those who end up dying to prevent the virus from spreading? Still, what percentage of people is that? Most of the Chinese people have not been tested and liberals crying like babies over it? The US has like 300 million people when there are maybe, 5 million test kits? So, are we to waste it on those not showing adverse symptoms so that, when test kits run out, the serious victims would not be tested because there are no test kits available? Doctors rightly, ration the test kits to serve the most serious victims with more serious symptoms.

 

[CaptainObvious]

I mean, we did over 2k dead Americans when the towers came down....with trumpets and bluster I might add.

True enough, but I think this is going to be much, much worse and long lasting

 

[Cuddles]

True enough, but I think this is going to be much, much worse and long lasting

How much was Bush's war, 3 trillion? Difficult to quantify the economic impact from that spending & squandered budget.

So far Trump's promised to throw 1.5 trillion at this problem in QE (without accounting for what's already been spent). The GDP impact will likely be easier to quantify than Bush's war however. It'd have probably been cheaper to have kept Obama's pandemic response program in place.

 

[El OchoCinco]

Everyone likes to post the stat's and numbers, except for this one. What percent of the population will die? In America the most level headed, non tinfoil cap wearing estimates run around 500,000 tops. We have what, 320,000,000 in the country. 500,000/320,000,000 =.0015625%.
Now I understand that we're trying to spread this out over several months rather than a couple, but the real deal, cut through all the shit question is, are will willing to risk an economic catastrophe which will impact tens of millions over several years trying to slow this down, in the end not really saving anyone who wasn't going to die from this anyway, most very elderly and sickly, and comprising what is a statistical rounding error of the population? I'm not saying we should or shouldn't, but this single question will become more prevalent moving forward as the pain of the current solutions being implemented become seemingly more destructive than the disease itself.
And before the pearl clutching outrage begins, I'm 68 with a mild heart condition which puts me somewhat in that high risk category. I don't think the country should be destroyed in an attempt to save me, especially considering I have by all sane and rational estimates a minimum 97% chance of just being really fucking sick for a week and surviving.

Why let 500,000 die if it is easily avoidable by having a crisis response team and putting testing kits in place to quicker contain this?

No one is destroying the country. Disneyworld will re open, flights will resume, schools will re open. Fedneral support for those that lost their jobs will be beneficial like after 9/11.

But life will go on after a 20 day pause.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Why let 500,000 die if it is easily avoidable by having a crisis response team and putting testing kits in place to quicker contain this?

No one is destroying the country. Disneyworld will re open, flights will resume, schools will re open. Fedneral support for those that lost their jobs will be beneficial like after 9/11.

But life will go on after a 20 day pause.

Two things. One, you're assuming the 500K deaths are ultimately preventable. I think that's overly optimistic. Two, you're assuming this pause will only last 20 days. I think it will last longer and if it doesn't the spread will continue aggressively. One of us will be wrong. Hopefully it's me and we'll know sooner than later.