Jump to content

Restarting America Means People Will Die. So When Should We Do It?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You're a smart guy. You're obviously aware that New Zealand is a suburb of Bondi, just round the corner from Random's joint in Queensland.  BJ can just yell over the fence at him.  Yes, the USA i

As much as I agree with the concept, I don't think it's possible to have a rational national discussion.  I don't think there's an appetite for a rational discussion on this board, let alone the great

Damn dude - who made you arbiter of everything?   That's a pretty f*cked up perspective, and you oughta punch yourself in the face for typing that.  You aren't her, you aren't part of that decision, a

Posted Images

6 hours ago, Ishmael said:

I figure I could get a reasonable life together after whatever calamity with 100 of the right people.

Unfortunately, they are all dead.

With 100 people you could get a steady food supply, fairly easily. I don't think you could sustain electricity & anything like plumbed-in water & sanitation system though. Huge drop in comfort lifestyle.

Who's gonna make the booze?

- DSK

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

With 100 people you could get a steady food supply, fairly easily. I don't think you could sustain electricity & anything like plumbed-in water & sanitation system though. Huge drop in comfort lifestyle.

Who's gonna make the booze?

- DSK

 

Agree.

What level of tech are you happy with?

Think on how far back you want to go for you level of medicine & dentistry, for example, and what level of tech/people to maintain that tech it requires.

I'm firmly in the 21C tech camp myself. Done the back to the land thing, hard work, not repaying.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Agree.

What level of tech are you happy with?

Think on how far back you want to go for you level of medicine & dentistry, for example, and what level of tech/people to maintain that tech it requires.

I'm firmly in the 21C tech camp myself. Done the back to the land thing, hard work, not repaying.

FKT

Fuck I hadn't even thought of dentristry yet.

Carrying forward the keys of microbiology won't be too hard but to keep much of the applicable technology will take a LOT of people.

One of the things I found very ironic ("ironic" is code for "stupid as fuck") about survivalists here in the USA is that a LOT of them are anti-vaxxers and will even deny the germ theory of disease (this is "theory" like the theory of gravity), and make no preparation at all to learn anything about what they'll need for safe water supply much less medical care beyond stockpiling their blood pressure meds.

The other thing is, I find it far more likely that civilization is collapsing without a massive depopulation event. Indeed with a growing population. Not to say human population won't end up far far lower, but that'll be several generations ahead.

I remember in a lot of old-time cruising books, cruisers from the 1st world visiting 3rd world villages and being asked to be their dentist & doctor.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Fuck I hadn't even thought of dentristry yet.

Carrying forward the keys of microbiology won't be too hard but to keep much of the applicable technology will take a LOT of people.

One of the things I found very ironic ("ironic" is code for "stupid as fuck") about survivalists here in the USA is that a LOT of them are anti-vaxxers and will even deny the germ theory of disease (this is "theory" like the theory of gravity), and make no preparation at all to learn anything about what they'll need for safe water supply much less medical care beyond stockpiling their blood pressure meds.

The other thing is, I find it far more likely that civilization is collapsing without a massive depopulation event. Indeed with a growing population. Not to say human population won't end up far far lower, but that'll be several generations ahead.

I remember in a lot of old-time cruising books, cruisers from the 1st world visiting 3rd world villages and being asked to be their dentist & doctor.

- DSK

People are generally pig-ignorant of what it takes to sustain their cosy existence.

I was at a party in Tucson once when a young woman, when finding out she was with a bunch of mining engineers and mining engineering software types, started ripping into us about how we were destroying the planet.

One of the guys who'd had a beer or 3 too many returned the favour, starting at her head and working downwards, pointing out each article of clothing/jewellery and telling her it was a product of mining so she had to take it off. Ear rings, rings, teeth fillings, blouse - synthetic - belt (plastic) bra - metal clips, synthetic rubber.

All the way to her shoes.

She left. Bet she didn't even stop to think about hey hypocrisy though.

I've no idea what the minimum level of population is needed to maintain a 21C high tech lifestyle but I'd take a WAG at 250 million or so just to provide the pool for all the specialties. So the EU or the USA sized polity. If I'm wrong it'd be because it takes more, not less. That logistic tail is a right bastard.

FKT

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

I've no idea what the minimum level of population is needed to maintain a 21C high tech lifestyle but I'd take a WAG at 250 million or so just to provide the pool for all the specialties. So the EU or the USA sized polity. If I'm wrong it'd be because it takes more, not less. That logistic tail is a right bastard.

FKT

I've seen some of the 'what-ifs' largely based on analysis of future space colonies (both 'generational ships' and planet based)  and it's usually somewhere around 20,000 people IF its highly regulated and you're willing to force occupations on people and you control birth rate and you're starting from an foundation of knowledge and equipment.

To 'organically' support at 21C lifestyle without that kind of central control and planning would require a lot more people.  I don't know about 250 million but definitely millions.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, cmilliken said:
1 hour ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

I've no idea what the minimum level of population is needed to maintain a 21C high tech lifestyle but I'd take a WAG at 250 million or so just to provide the pool for all the specialties. So the EU or the USA sized polity. If I'm wrong it'd be because it takes more, not less. That logistic tail is a right bastard.

FKT

I've seen some of the 'what-ifs' largely based on analysis of future space colonies (both 'generational ships' and planet based)  and it's usually somewhere around 20,000 people IF its highly regulated and you're willing to force occupations on people and you control birth rate and you're starting from an foundation of knowledge and equipment.

To 'organically' support at 21C lifestyle without that kind of central control and planning would require a lot more people.  I don't know about 250 million but definitely millions.

That's kind of unrealistic, don't you think? "Force occupations on people?" Shucks, that's been tried and cannot be maintained with any kind of modern productive economy. You can't even force people to do a simple thing like grow cotton and make a profit.

Think about the size of a modern university... 25k people or more. And not every university supports every specialty. How many universities do we need to cover ALL the ground?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

AGITC thinks it’s wrong to summarily dismiss mass slaughter. Tom thinks it’s wrong if a gubmint does it. Jeffreaux says fire up the fucking ovens. Chum trolls. Dog looks for a toy.

I never once said anything about mass slaughter.  I just said I wouldn't shed a tear if they all suddenly fell over dead one night.  

But if we are talking about mass slaughter, I would start with the lawyers first.  ;)  Just saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Fuck I hadn't even thought of dentristry yet.

Carrying forward the keys of microbiology won't be too hard but to keep much of the applicable technology will take a LOT of people.

One of the things I found very ironic ("ironic" is code for "stupid as fuck") about survivalists here in the USA is that a LOT of them are anti-vaxxers and will even deny the germ theory of disease (this is "theory" like the theory of gravity), and make no preparation at all to learn anything about what they'll need for safe water supply much less medical care beyond stockpiling their blood pressure meds.

The other thing is, I find it far more likely that civilization is collapsing without a massive depopulation event. Indeed with a growing population. Not to say human population won't end up far far lower, but that'll be several generations ahead.

I remember in a lot of old-time cruising books, cruisers from the 1st world visiting 3rd world villages and being asked to be their dentist & doctor.

- DSK

This is why I would never advocate for the entire population to vanish and be down to only a few thou or even a few million.  I figure if 6 of the 7 billion went poof over night, there would be plenty of room and shared talent to build a decent planet back up.  Global warming would cease to be an issue overnight.  There would be a lot of tech and machinery laying around and with a pool of a billion or so, surely there would be some engineers, docs, sewage, water and electricity techs, etc to get it all running.  Lots of aircraft and fuel laying about too so we could shuttle folks around easily as needed.  

One of my favorite B-grade scifi movies as a kid was there were some folks in a cave while some cataclysmic sunspot event essentially vaporized everyone where they stood.  Just a bit of ash in their crumpled clothes.  Of course the science never explained why their clothes didn't also combust, but that's why it was a B-grade movie.  For end of the world dreams, I also really liked "I am Legend" with Will Smith.  I could be very happy with a German Shepard and a city of toys at my disposal to play with.  If it wasn't for those damn Zombies to fuck everything up at night, it would be paradise.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

I never once said anything about mass slaughter.  I just said I wouldn't shed a tear if they all suddenly fell over dead one night.  

 

Rock out with your cock out!

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

This is why I would never advocate for the entire population to vanish and be down to only a few thou or even a few million.  I figure if 6 of the 7 billion went poof over night, there would be plenty of room and shared talent to build a decent planet back up.  Global warming would cease to be an issue overnight.  There would be a lot of tech and machinery laying around and with a pool of a billion or so, surely there would be some engineers, docs, sewage, water and electricity techs, etc to get it all running.  Lots of aircraft and fuel laying about too so we could shuttle folks around easily as needed.  

One of my favorite B-grade scifi movies as a kid was there were some folks in a cave while some cataclysmic sunspot event essentially vaporized everyone where they stood.  Just a bit of ash in their crumpled clothes.  Of course the science never explained why their clothes didn't also combust, but that's why it was a B-grade movie.  For end of the world dreams, I also really liked "I am Legend" with Will Smith.  I could be very happy with a German Shepard and a city of toys at my disposal to play with.  If it wasn't for those damn Zombies to fuck everything up at night, it would be paradise.  

The folks Best Prepared for the next life should be in church about now. Perhaps an afternoon protest is in order. Let them get out and own those libs!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

436CF479-A20A-4DF8-B637-64D1340BA691.jpeg

Agree.  Furthermore, if they are not open first - then they pretty much have proven they are not "essential" businesses.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

 to cover ALL the ground?

 

Why would you want to do that?

Have you ever tossed a ratty old obscure spare part or tool that you haven't used in years?

Next day, or at least within a week, you suddenly need it...

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

This is why I would never advocate for the entire population to vanish and be down to only a few thou or even a few million.  I figure if 6 of the 7 billion went poof over night, there would be plenty of room and shared talent to build a decent planet back up.  Global warming would cease to be an issue overnight.  There would be a lot of tech and machinery laying around and with a pool of a billion or so, surely there would be some engineers, docs, sewage, water and electricity techs, etc to get it all running.  Lots of aircraft and fuel laying about too so we could shuttle folks around easily as needed.  

One of my favorite B-grade scifi movies as a kid was there were some folks in a cave while some cataclysmic sunspot event essentially vaporized everyone where they stood.  Just a bit of ash in their crumpled clothes.  Of course the science never explained why their clothes didn't also combust, but that's why it was a B-grade movie.  For end of the world dreams, I also really liked "I am Legend" with Will Smith.  I could be very happy with a German Shepard and a city of toys at my disposal to play with.  If it wasn't for those damn Zombies to fuck everything up at night, it would be paradise.  

Yer a shitty sci-fi writer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

That's kind of unrealistic, don't you think? "Force occupations on people?" Shucks, that's been tried and cannot be maintained with any kind of modern productive economy. You can't even force people to do a simple thing like grow cotton and make a profit.

Think about the size of a modern university... 25k people or more. And not every university supports every specialty. How many universities do we need to cover ALL the ground?

- DSK

That's the difference between "a random economy" and a "planned economy".  Ultimately, it really comes down to constraints.  You have to balance free will and a practical carrying capacity of the environment.  The 20K number actually includes SOME level of choice - Usually it's sort of like the US military where you get to pick 3 to 5 vocations based on your ASVAB qualifications and they slot you from there.  And no, I'm not advocating.

One of the more interesting impacts of COVID on the 'pepper' folks is how some of them have started realizing that community matters and that quaint little McCabin off by itself is both lonely and unprotectable.    "Bugout" is being replaced by "BugIn".  I think there's going to be even more 'planned communities' in the near future, and not just to keep the poor folks out.  Like we needed more reason to enclave-it-up.

Ah well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Blue Crab said:

This is when those country smarts would be valuable. No hipsters/metrosexuals/transwhatevers/small cute dogs/geezers welcome.

image.thumb.png.15e2450ce788bd13557c0f0d35fd85d2.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

People are generally pig-ignorant of what it takes to sustain their cosy existence.

I was at a party in Tucson once when a young woman, when finding out she was with a bunch of mining engineers and mining engineering software types, started ripping into us about how we were destroying the planet.

One of the guys who'd had a beer or 3 too many returned the favour, starting at her head and working downwards, pointing out each article of clothing/jewellery and telling her it was a product of mining so she had to take it off. Ear rings, rings, teeth fillings, blouse - synthetic - belt (plastic) bra - metal clips, synthetic rubber.

All the way to her shoes.

She left. Bet she didn't even stop to think about hey hypocrisy though.

I've no idea what the minimum level of population is needed to maintain a 21C high tech lifestyle but I'd take a WAG at 250 million or so just to provide the pool for all the specialties. So the EU or the USA sized polity. If I'm wrong it'd be because it takes more, not less. That logistic tail is a right bastard.

FKT

She wasn't hypocritical, just clueless - all that stuff came from the store, not the ground.

Arthur C. Clarke was a pretty smart guy - he calculated that 1.5 Billion people was plenty to cover all eventualities.

About what the world population was 100 years ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

I think we all agree the world would be better with 6B less people. The argument is who gets to choose.

Well the White Christian instruction book says the meek shall inherit the earth. So the White Christians, being the farthest from meek*, could start by offing themselves. I'll pay for the Kool Aid.

(* quiet, gentle, submissive.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

This is why I would never advocate for the entire population to vanish and be down to only a few thou or even a few million.  I figure if 6 of the 7 billion went poof over night, there would be plenty of room and shared talent to build a decent planet back up.  Global warming would cease to be an issue overnight.  There would be a lot of tech and machinery laying around and with a pool of a billion or so, surely there would be some engineers, docs, sewage, water and electricity techs, etc to get it all running.  Lots of aircraft and fuel laying about too so we could shuttle folks around easily as needed.  

One of my favorite B-grade scifi movies as a kid was there were some folks in a cave while some cataclysmic sunspot event essentially vaporized everyone where they stood.  Just a bit of ash in their crumpled clothes.  Of course the science never explained why their clothes didn't also combust, but that's why it was a B-grade movie.  For end of the world dreams, I also really liked "I am Legend" with Will Smith.  I could be very happy with a German Shepard and a city of toys at my disposal to play with.  If it wasn't for those damn Zombies to fuck everything up at night, it would be paradise.  

"Where have all the people gone?"

I remember that one.  I actually put that into my list to record if it ever comes on again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

This is why I would never advocate for the entire population to vanish and be down to only a few thou or even a few million.  I figure if 6 of the 7 billion went poof over night, there would be plenty of room and shared talent to build a decent planet back up.  Global warming would cease to be an issue overnight.  There would be a lot of tech and machinery laying around and with a pool of a billion or so, surely there would be some engineers, docs, sewage, water and electricity techs, etc to get it all running.  Lots of aircraft and fuel laying about too so we could shuttle folks around easily as needed.  

One of my favorite B-grade scifi movies as a kid was there were some folks in a cave while some cataclysmic sunspot event essentially vaporized everyone where they stood.  Just a bit of ash in their crumpled clothes.  Of course the science never explained why their clothes didn't also combust, but that's why it was a B-grade movie.  For end of the world dreams, I also really liked "I am Legend" with Will Smith.  I could be very happy with a German Shepard and a city of toys at my disposal to play with.  If it wasn't for those damn Zombies to fuck everything up at night, it would be paradise.  

Check it out. 

 https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/boy_and_his_dog

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Arthur C. Clarke was a pretty smart guy - he calculated that 1.5 Billion people was plenty to cover all eventualities.

About what the world population was 100 years ago.

See, I'm right in the ballpark there.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Have you ever tossed a ratty old obscure spare part or tool that you haven't used in years?

Next day, or at least within a week, you suddenly need it...

- DSK

That logic leads to the pack rat disorder. My GF's brother had that. When he died we threw out 2 BIG skips of stuff I considered junk, made anyone watching who said 'That's too good to toss' take immediate possession of said item and remove it from the premises......

AND I STILL have 'stuff' of his in my shed that was too good to toss. But I've never found any use for it.

Along with all the really good, cool stuff, because my GF was executor and one of the 2 beneficiaries....

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Blue Crab said:

I think we all agree the world would be better with 6B less people. The argument is who gets to choose.

I'll do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SloopJonB said:
10 hours ago, Blue Crab said:

I think we all agree the world would be better with 6B less people. The argument is who gets to choose.

I'll do it.

Hey @Mismoyled Jiblet., your boy @SloopJonB here is saying he is up for mass slaughter and firing up the ovens and he'll gladly do the choosing as to who get gets a bullet in the head and tossed in the oven.  How does this sit with you?  You ok with this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote
 
 
 
 
2
16 hours ago, mikewof said:

Okay, so now I'm curious ... you keep writing that the CDC data isn't useful for what I'm looking at. So what do you think I'm looking at that makes the data useless?

That data can't "support or disprove" a hypothesis and I'm not asking it to do that. It seems that whole process offends you for some reason, and you want data in every step to be non-problematic. If preliminary data is problematic, you just don't use it, you move on. But you're essentially saying "don't even us it to get an idea what's going on."

You're taking the column labelled  "Covid-19 Deaths", and comparing it to the column labelled "Deaths with Pneumonia and Covid-19"; correct?

Then comparing that ratio, between different locations.  Correct?

So, you're assuming that: 

  • the data from one column is meant to be compared (or at least, suitable for comparison) to the data from another column
  • 07.0 excludes patients with pneumonia 
  • J12.0 through J18.9 includes only (or at least, mostly), patients with a bacterial infection
  • J09-J11 does not include anyone with pneumonia
  • the data from one geographic area can be validly compared to data from a different area

Correct?

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

36,000 Missing Deaths:

Where we found higher deaths than normal

Area PCT. above normal Excess deaths Reported Covid-19 deaths = Difference
Spain
Mar. 9 - Apr. 5
66% 19,700 12,401 = 7,300
Ecuador
Mar. 1 - Apr. 15
83% 7,600 503 = 7,100
France
Mar. 9 - Apr. 5
32% 14,500 8,059 = 6,500
England & Wales
Mar. 7 - Apr. 10
33% 16,700 10,335 = 6,300
New York City
Mar. 11 - Apr. 22
300% 19,200 15,411 = 3,800
Netherlands
Mar. 9 - Apr. 5
33% 4,000 2,166 = 1,900
Jakarta
March
57% 1,600 84 = 1,500
Istanbul
Mar. 9 - Apr. 12
29% 2,100 1,006 = 1,100
Switzerland
Mar. 9 - Apr. 5
21% 1,000 712 = 300
Belgium
Mar. 9 - Apr. 5
25% 2,300 2,373 = -30
Sweden
Mar. 9 - Apr. 12
12% 1,100 1,160 = -50
 
Note: Excess deaths are estimates that include deaths from Covid-19 and other causes. Reported Covid-19 deaths reflect official coronavirus deaths during the period when all-cause mortality data is available, including figures that were later revised. Istanbul reported deaths include those for all of Turkey.

These numbers undermine the notion that many people who have died from the virus may soon have died anyway. In Paris, more than twice the usual number of people have died each day, far more than the peak of a bad flu season. In New York City, the number is now four times the normal amount.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:
22 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Have you ever tossed a ratty old obscure spare part or tool that you haven't used in years?

Next day, or at least within a week, you suddenly need it...

 

That logic leads to the pack rat disorder. My GF's brother had that. When he died we threw out 2 BIG skips of stuff I considered junk, made anyone watching who said 'That's too good to toss' take immediate possession of said item and remove it from the premises......

AND I STILL have 'stuff' of his in my shed that was too good to toss. But I've never found any use for it.

Along with all the really good, cool stuff, because my GF was executor and one of the 2 beneficiaries....

FKT

Well, there you go. The only disagreement we have is what constitutes "junk better thrown away" and "really good cool stuff." I freely grant that you have higher standards than I do.

I also had a forced culling of my good-enough-to-keep stuff by hurricane last year. That lowered the standards a bit, although I'm now tossing more as I upgrade storage- just finished a project of an overhead bin for raw materials... shit is heavier than I thought, had to upgrade the lifting tackle twice...

But getting back to the original point, IMHO it's impossible to sort essential 'top-tier' skills from unessential. Take lawyers, for example. Yeah the USA could use a hell of a lot less lawyers, but OTOH we do need lawyers. If one were try and centrally plan a modern society from a clean sheet, it would be a very very precarious thing, you don't know what you need until things start crashing for the lack of left-handed widget repairmen.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

But getting back to the original point, IMHO it's impossible to sort essential 'top-tier' skills from unessential. Take lawyers, for example. Yeah the USA could use a hell of a lot less lawyers, but OTOH we do need lawyers. If one were try and centrally plan a modern society from a clean sheet, it would be a very very precarious thing, you don't know what you need until things start crashing for the lack of left-handed widget repairmen.

- DSK

Agree. I've read all those sci-fi books on slower than light space travel and planned communities. I don't think it'll ever work because of just that - random stuff nobody thought of causing cascading failures.

Hell, what sort of logistic tail does it take to keep one aircraft carrier at sea? And it's not even growing its own food or mining/refining its own metal.

Where I live the island population is ~500K. My WAG is we could maintain a late 19C to early 20C tech, more than that in some select areas perhaps, if totally isolated. But we've fairly massive hydro plants for electricity and reasonable minerals. We'd have to devote resources to maintaining that else everything would go to shit, and I really really doubt the no tech knowledge people would agree to that.

WRT pack-rattery, I'm about to conduct another cull. Funny thing though, I loaned out my hydraulic wire crimpers the other day, haven't used them in well over 12 months. Now I've almost finished fitting another PV panel to the boat, I suddenly need them back...... perhaps I should buy a second set?

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Agree. I've read all those sci-fi books on slower than light space travel and planned communities. I don't think it'll ever work because of just that - random stuff nobody thought of causing cascading failures.

Hell, what sort of logistic tail does it take to keep one aircraft carrier at sea? And it's not even growing its own food or mining/refining its own metal.

Where I live the island population is ~500K. My WAG is we could maintain a late 19C to early 20C tech, more than that in some select areas perhaps, if totally isolated. But we've fairly massive hydro plants for electricity and reasonable minerals. We'd have to devote resources to maintaining that else everything would go to shit, and I really really doubt the no tech knowledge people would agree to that.

WRT pack-rattery, I'm about to conduct another cull. Funny thing though, I loaned out my hydraulic wire crimpers the other day, haven't used them in well over 12 months. Now I've almost finished fitting another PV panel to the boat, I suddenly need them back...... perhaps I should buy a second set?

FKT

Ever read Island in the Sea of Time by S.M. Stirling?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

Sucks to be you.  Hope you stocked up on beer and whine.  

Jeffreaux rule 1^^^

Plenty of booze, as my liquor store does curbside pickup. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, B.J. Porter said:

Ever read Island in the Sea of Time by S.M. Stirling?

Yeah I've got the 3 volume series. Interesting take on things I thought. What level of tech can one sustain....

Also the 1632 series of books. Same basic starting point. There are a number of others.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Yeah I've got the 3 volume series. Interesting take on things I thought. What level of tech can one sustain....

Also the 1632 series of books. Same basic starting point. There are a number of others.

FKT

Yeah, there's that other series, starts with Dies the Fire, about the sudden cessation of most technology.

Link to post
Share on other sites

California Governor - today

cases are flat, not yet declining, so good but not quite there, still weeks away, not months

focusing on testing, trace management (good thing IMHO)

Bombshell was "schools will open early, really early, like midsummer. Mid-late July, to take advantage of any seasonality that might be present"

That's a wow.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

(Sorry if has been mentioned elsewhere - lotsa chores today...)

Anyone pondered the disconnect between on the one hand Barr throwing red meat to the faithful by threatening constitutional action about the draconian (D) stay-at-home orders, and on the other hand Trump considering ordering meat packers back to work agains their will?

(Can the WH even order illegal undocumented workers to work? Heh.)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, El Boracho said:

(Sorry if has been mentioned elsewhere - lotsa chores today...)

Anyone pondered the disconnect between on the one hand Barr throwing red meat to the faithful by threatening constitutional action about the draconian (D) stay-at-home orders, and on the other hand Trump considering ordering meat packers back to work agains their will?

(Can the WH even order illegal undocumented workers to work? Heh.)

 

Sure. They can send DHS guys in shifts to lash them into working harder.

And in their off-hours, when they're not being flogged in the factory, they can go into the fields and grow cotton.

If they won't, we'll put their children in cages!

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

Yeah, there's that other series, starts with Dies the Fire, about the sudden cessation of most technology.

I didn't read that one, it lacked appeal for some reason.

The subject is of interest to me because of my long-standing interest in the evolution of technology. I have quite a lot of books on the rise of the industrial revolution and the advances in technology. Very few people realise just what a sharp pyramid we're sitting on and what a force multiplier modern tech is. Compare the effort needed to cut down a tree with a stone axe compared to a steel one, then a chainsaw. Now think on the sophistication invested in that lovely local anaesthetic shot you got at the dentist, from that hair-thin needle. Follow that tech pyramid back - how far do you want to go?

If I ever got to the UK I would happily spend a lot of time in their museums and touring their old industrial sites.

My GF would tour their grand gardens.... maybe we'd hire a canal boat to move about though.

FKT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Sure. They can send DHS guys in shifts to lash them into working harder.

And in their off-hours, when they're not being flogged in the factory, they can go into the fields and grow cotton.

If they won't, we'll put their children in cages!

- DSK

It doesn't sound as good when you put it that way.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cmilliken said:

COVID Simulator out of Umass / Harvard

https://www.covid19sim.org/

 

Hmm...if you keep "Current restrictions" for four weeks, then "minimal restrictions" for 12, the numbers are appalling.

Keeping "Current restrictions" for eight weeks cuts the numbers from ~1,8M dead to around 90,000.

So...Trump wants everything open in two weeks, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, B.J. Porter said:

Hmm...if you keep "Current restrictions" for four weeks, then "minimal restrictions" for 12, the numbers are appalling.

Keeping "Current restrictions" for eight weeks cuts the numbers from ~1,8M dead to around 90,000.

So...Trump wants everything open in two weeks, right?

Georgia and Floriduh might change that plan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, B.J. Porter said:

Hmm...if you keep "Current restrictions" for four weeks, then "minimal restrictions" for 12, the numbers are appalling.

Keeping "Current restrictions" for eight weeks cuts the numbers from ~1,8M dead to around 90,000.

So...Trump wants everything open in two weeks, right?

Stupidity has consequences.

There's no functional difference between wilful ignorance and stupidity. The end result works out the same.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Yeah I've got the 3 volume series. Interesting take on things I thought. What level of tech can one sustain....

Also the 1632 series of books. Same basic starting point. There are a number of others.

FKT

Do you know about the amazing story of Thomas Meagher and his connection to Irish freedom, the US civil war, and Taz ? 

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25897805-the-immortal-irishman

A good read indeed, and true even (mostly, I think) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As the Pres and most Red states advocate for opening up for business despite threats to public health, Congress seems to disagree...

"We made a judgment that we will not come back next week but that we hope to come back very soon,"

In other words, 'Let's watch the canary.'

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Liking doesn’t seem appropriate.

Yea, understood.

I wish that it would allow for longer time scales - the four month window is far too short IMHO.   That's the problem with the 'hard lockdown' version - no one gets expose, no one get sick, but there's no cure/remedy either.  In four months, you get the play the same game with the same conditions unless you're willing to isolate travel or have some sort of 100% screening capability.

I would prefer if they could add at least a few such boundary conditions.  If there is a vaccine in 10/1/2020 or a treatment that reduces mortality by 50% on 8/15/20.  That would be more useful.

But it's ok.  Models are models.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Willin' said:

As the Pres and most Red states advocate for opening up for business despite threats to public health, Congress seems to disagree...

"We made a judgment that we will not come back next week but that we hope to come back very soon,"

In other words, 'Let's watch the canary.'

Watch what they do not what they say. Most of the critters are in the high risk category and have better access to relevant upto date information.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, cmilliken said:

Yea, understood.

I wish that it would allow for longer time scales - the four month window is far too short IMHO.   That's the problem with the 'hard lockdown' version - no one gets expose, no one get sick, but there's no cure/remedy either.  In four months, you get the play the same game with the same conditions unless you're willing to isolate travel or have some sort of 100% screening capability.

I would prefer if they could add at least a few such boundary conditions.  If there is a vaccine in 10/1/2020 or a treatment that reduces mortality by 50% on 8/15/20.  That would be more useful.

But it's ok.  Models are models.

 

This is the issue I have with hard lockdowns for a significantly longer period without a vaccine in sight.  You are just kicking the can down the road while destroying the economy in the process.  

I was listening to an NPR segment yesterday that says it would likely take around $4B to rapidly stand up a decent contact tracing system.  Many think it would happen overnight.  But nothing happens that fast here in the US.  We are far too decentralized (by design) and far too disorganized (on our best days) to be able to stand up that capability that rapidly.  Sadly, I think we're going to have to accept that the younger and healthy will likely get exposed at some point and the vast majority will have relatively minor symptoms and move on.  As I've said before, we need to focus ALL of our current efforts at protecting the most vulnerable and doing our best to quarantine them to reduce risk of exposure until we can find a vaccine to mitigate against the worst outcomes.  But keeping the country locked down for many more months, IMHO is simply not feasible or we will be doing much more harm overall to our society than just people dying of "The Sickness".  

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

Hmm...if you keep "Current restrictions" for four weeks, then "minimal restrictions" for 12, the numbers are appalling.

Keeping "Current restrictions" for eight weeks cuts the numbers from ~1,8M dead to around 90,000.

So...Trump wants everything open in two weeks, right?

Wrong. 1 week

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

Hmm...if you keep "Current restrictions" for four weeks, then "minimal restrictions" for 12, the numbers are appalling.

Keeping "Current restrictions" for eight weeks cuts the numbers from ~1,8M dead to around 90,000.

So...Trump wants everything open in two weeks, right?

Say Trumpaloos. 

Is 1.8M enough lower than 2.2M that Trump can still claim success?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ishmael said:

Anything less than total obliteration will be claimed as success.

I think as long as Trump himself is still alive, any number of dead Americans doesn't really matter. Too the Trumpaloos that is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

That's not a real question is it?

Yeah, you're probably right. Of course that would be a great success. Just ask Jared.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is simply no way to quarantine those at risk while everything else goes back to normal. First, we don't know who is really at risk, we don't understand the virus well enough yet. Second, the numbers of those at risk are between 20-60% of the population, so not a small number. Third, those at risk are deeply connected to those who are not, and are dependent on the same systems as everyone for basic needs, so those systems would need to be recreated for everyone at risk or else we would just be consciously deciding to let a significant number of people die out of convenience, while pretending we are doing something to save them. Lastly, I continue to see implied in these quarantine those at risk ideas the notion that those at risk are all retired and elderly, so not crucial to the running of society when it "opens up" again. That is simply not true in any meaningful way. Those at risk are overrepresented in the retired category, but they are also significantly represented in the CEO, professional, working parent, primary earner categories. So figure that one out while you are at it. How do you manage the situation of a dentist who is also the primary earner for his household and who has young kids, while also being in his fifties with high blood pressure and diabetes? 

If there was a less disruptive way to immediately deal with a global pandemic, countries would have taken that option. There is not a better way. We screwed the pooch by optimizing our healthcare system for profits, which means there is no excess capacity in the system, and the only way to deal with something like this is dramatic measures to flatten the curve. Too much faith in capitalism got us into this, the tools which got us into the mess will not get us out of it. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:
19 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

Hmm...if you keep "Current restrictions" for four weeks, then "minimal restrictions" for 12, the numbers are appalling.

Keeping "Current restrictions" for eight weeks cuts the numbers from ~1,8M dead to around 90,000.

So...Trump wants everything open in two weeks, right?

Wrong. 1 week

I was being charitable...

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, LenP said:

There is simply no way to quarantine those at risk while everything else goes back to normal. First, we don't know who is really at risk, we don't understand the virus well enough yet. Second, the numbers of those at risk are between 20-60% of the population, so not a small number. Third, those at risk are deeply connected to those who are not, and are dependent on the same systems as everyone for basic needs, so those systems would need to be recreated for everyone at risk or else we would just be consciously deciding to let a significant number of people die out of convenience, while pretending we are doing something to save them. Lastly, I continue to see implied in these quarantine those at risk ideas the notion that those at risk are all retired and elderly, so not crucial to the running of society when it "opens up" again. That is simply not true in any meaningful way. Those at risk are overrepresented in the retired category, but they are also significantly represented in the CEO, professional, working parent, primary earner categories. So figure that one out while you are at it. How do you manage the situation of a dentist who is also the primary earner for his household and who has young kids, while also being in his fifties with high blood pressure and diabetes? 

If there was a less disruptive way to immediately deal with a global pandemic, countries would have taken that option. There is not a better way. We screwed the pooch by optimizing our healthcare system for profits, which means there is no excess capacity in the system, and the only way to deal with something like this is dramatic measures to flatten the curve. Too much faith in capitalism got us into this, the tools which got us into the mess will not get us out of it. 

^ Nailed it ^

The one and only little comment I have on the above.... it's not "capitalism" that the USA is currently exerting too much faith in; it's a perverse form of predatory, dysfunctional capitalism.

"Capitalism" covers a really wide range of economic systems with the basis of allocating goods by market and reward for applying concentrated wealth to solve big problems. The USA has stumbled down into a morass of crony-driven winner-take-all capitalism, where the greatest concentration of capital is focused on using the government to stifle markets.

The problem that the USA's health care system has fallen into this same morass is one that's been talked about and worked on since the 1930s, in push-pull fashion, but has always been subject to the same harpy's seduction as the rest of our economy.

It's been killing us by the millions for years. Now it's killed tens of thousands in the blink of an eye and the problem is both more acute and a lot more obvious to all.

Where we go with it from here, that's NOT obvious. And the harpies are still screeching.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blue Crab said:
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

Say Trumpaloos. 

Is 1.8M enough lower than 2.2M that Trump can still claim success?

That's not a real question is it?

Not really. I honestly think Trump can get ANY outcome and some of the hard core stupids will defend his "perfect" response and blame Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, and the Derp State for anything they don't like.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, cmilliken said:

I wish that it would allow for longer time scales - the four month window is far too short IMHO.   That's the problem with the 'hard lockdown' version - no one gets expose, no one get sick, but there's no cure/remedy either.  In four months, you get the play the same game with the same conditions unless you're willing to isolate travel or have some sort of 100% screening capability.

 

2 hours ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

This is the issue I have with hard lockdowns for a significantly longer period without a vaccine in sight.  You are just kicking the can down the road while destroying the economy in the process.  

I haven't played with it, but... that doesn't make a lot of sense?  If you have a hard lockdown, for even two months, all of the existing cases resolve, one way or another.  No lockdown's so hard as to be absolute, so you'll have some active cases to get the transmission ball rolling again, but... you should be starting from a lower number, and a slightly slower transmission rate (since some of the population will have become immune)?

 

55 minutes ago, LenP said:

We screwed the pooch by optimizing our healthcare system for profits, which means there is no excess capacity in the system

Much as I'm a devoted advocate for single-payer, I'm not sure those are linked in any meaningful way.  We actually have more surplus capacity, in a lot of things (critical care beds comes to mind) than a lot / most of the less capitalistic countries.  What we lack, that most of them have, is a coherent public health system.  Our resources, while plentiful, don't get allocated in the most efficient or useful way: the spectacle of various State & Federal agencies bidding against each other for PPE, for example... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, frenchie said:
2 hours ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

This is the issue I have with hard lockdowns for a significantly longer period without a vaccine in sight.  You are just kicking the can down the road while destroying the economy in the process.  

I haven't played with it, but... that doesn't make a lot of sense?  If you have a hard lockdown, for even two months, all of the existing cases resolve, one way or another.  No lockdown's so hard as to be absolute, so you'll have some active cases to get the transmission ball rolling again, but... you should be starting from a lower number, and a slightly slower transmission rate (since some of the population will have become immune)?

This has worked in New Zealand.

Yes, it's smaller and it's an island.

But the point is if you shut things down hard, the spreading stops. A shut down is a shut down. Close the borders, stop people moving around unless absolutely necessary. Minimize contact outside your "bubble" - your immediate household.

 

NZ was at 100 confirmed cases when they shut things down. Equivalent to about 6,600 in the US (multiply by 330/5 = 66)

Yesterday there were two (2) new cases. There are six (6) people in the hospital still. Total cases is under 1,500 still.

Note that even shutting down at 100 cases, the carry through turned up 15X the number overall. It's not and immediate cessation of new cases, and it takes more time than most Americans have patience for.

The total of 19 dead is mostly from two nursing home clusters, not general population transmission.

 

Having a government concerned about all of it's people instead of it's corporations, billionaires, and wealth makes a big difference in the will to do this. The Kiwis trust their government, and the government has earned it.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, B.J. Porter said:

This has worked in New Zealand.

Yes, it's smaller and it's an island.

But the point is if you shut things down hard, the spreading stops. A shut down is a shut down. Close the borders, stop people moving around unless absolutely necessary. Minimize contact outside your "bubble" - your immediate household.

 

NZ was at 100 confirmed cases when they shut things down. Equivalent to about 6,600 in the US (multiply by 330/5 = 66)

Yesterday there were two (2) new cases. There are six (6) people in the hospital still. Total cases is under 1,500 still.

Note that even shutting down at 100 cases, the carry through turned up 15X the number overall. It's not and immediate cessation of new cases, and it takes more time than most Americans have patience for.

The total of 19 dead is mostly from two nursing home clusters, not general population transmission.

 

Having a government concerned about all of it's people instead of it's corporations, billionaires, and wealth makes a big difference in the will to do this. The Kiwis trust their government, and the government has earned it.

The Best Americans are entitled to their preferential treatment. They earned it the hard way. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, frenchie said:

 

...

 

Much as I'm a devoted advocate for single-payer, I'm not sure those are linked in any meaningful way.  We actually have more surplus capacity, in a lot of things (critical care beds comes to mind) than a lot / most of the less capitalistic countries.  What we lack, that most of them have, is a coherent public health system.  Our resources, while plentiful, don't get allocated in the most efficient or useful way: the spectacle of various State & Federal agencies bidding against each other for PPE, for example... 

Empty hospital beds are expensive. The figures I've seen show the US as having less hospital capacity per capita than the other G7 and developed countries.

Spot on about the lack of a coherent public health system.

The Feds bidding against the states is pure Trumpublican predatory capitalism. And please note, the Feds have more & bigger guns, when push comes to shove

- DSK

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, frenchie said:

I haven't played with it, but... that doesn't make a lot of sense?  If you have a hard lockdown, for even two months, all of the existing cases resolve, one way or another.  No lockdown's so hard as to be absolute, so you'll have some active cases to get the transmission ball rolling again, but... you should be starting from a lower number, and a slightly slower transmission rate (since some of the population will have become immune)?

The problem is the infamous 'next wave'. 

Take it as accepted that we will not have a tsunami of patients and that the health care system can address every new case that happens.  We're only talking about the 'normal' course of the virus.

We believe that the coronavirus is transmitted by asymptomatic carriers.  We have a general lack of testing and an acute lack of 'quick' testing.   Therefore, we're not going to be able to detect state to state transmission unless we also forbid state to state transfer. 

The hard lock down work because they allow the virus to die out but ultimately you'll keep re-infecting until you eventually come up with either an inoculation or a cure.

The model, as presented, doesn't factor any of that in.  It's just a 'exponential' growth model playing with three values that terminates after one cycle.  It's fine for what it is but there's a lot better models - 3Blue1Brown did several videos on it that were much more effective illustration of the problem.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Or central quarantine of suspected cases post lockdown. I mean... there are other country’s doing this. It shouldn’t be a shocker. If it is, reappraise your info stream.

all in all this thread is a shining example of the tedious failure of US political “debate”. We refuse to acknowledge other ways of doing things and just fatalistically accept failure for “reasons” and so pretend shit just doesn’t exist

One of the reasons given for the Level 3 requirement to keep your social "bubbles" small still is contact tracing, and by extension the ability to isolate suspected cases and a carriers.

Tradesman are required to check in at marinas, for example, so that contact tracing will be facilitate. You can get work done on your boat if you get off it when the tradesman is there and he checks in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Or central quarantine of suspected cases post lockdown. I mean... there are other country’s doing this. It shouldn’t be a shocker. If it is, reappraise your info stream.

all in all this thread is a shining example of the tedious failure of US political “debate”. We refuse to acknowledge other ways of doing things and just fatalistically accept failure for “reasons” and so pretend shit just doesn’t exist

This is the economic incentive for many not to seek a formal diagnosis.   Claim food poisoning so the shop or car isn’t shut down as long.   The grey economy and those with side gigs only slowed with government money.    A friend drove to another city for a day’s work since unemployment has yet to arrive after a month.       
Many will be forced by necessity to circumvent the system proposed for Ohio.    Others will by greed.  I could imagine a devious person sending an infected customer to the competition, expecting a mild or no illness but the competing hair stylest sent home for two weeks.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, B.J. Porter said:

One of the reasons given for the Level 3 requirement to keep your social "bubbles" small still is contact tracing, and by extension the ability to isolate suspected cases and a carriers.

Tradesman are required to check in at marinas, for example, so that contact tracing will be facilitate. You can get work done on your boat if you get off it when the tradesman is there and he checks in.

If the Germans are correct and their first community case occurred from a salt shaker, do we make you stay off the boat for a couple days after the repair?    Contact tracing assumes all spreaders became symptomatic within a couple days so the government guys can find and quarantine the contacts before they start spreading it themselves.    Do you have evidence everyone who spreads it gets sick?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Lark said:

If the Germans are correct and their first community case occurred from a salt shaker, do we make you stay off the boat for a couple days after the repair?    Contact tracing assumes all spreaders became symptomatic within a couple days so the government guys can find and quarantine the contacts before they start spreading it themselves.    Do you have evidence everyone who spreads it gets sick?

My understanding is that it's 7 to 12 days after infection to the onset of symptoms. And symptoms may be mild enough to not register as an illness needing treatment. And the person is most contagious before onset of symptoms.

It's this delay that makes it so difficult to keep a lid on.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Empty hospital beds are expensive. The figures I've seen show the US as having less hospital capacity per capita than the other G7 and developed countries.

Spot on about the lack of a coherent public health system.

The Feds bidding against the states is pure Trumpublican predatory capitalism. And please note, the Feds have more & bigger guns, when push comes to shove

- DSK

 

Public hospitals had closed before this happened, just part of the normal demographic shift.

When I was a kid, public schools all over my city had closed, there weren't enough students anymore to justify keeping so many of them open once the wave of Baby Boomers had graduated.

And in the case of hospitals, the capacity wasn't needed, and there was a plague of open beds throughout the industry. The Boomers weren't really old enough to need extensive hospitalization, and the generation before them has been dying off. So now we'll likely see a new wave of hospitals opening up again over the next ten years. It will be a good time to be in that business.

If nothing else, SARS-CoV-2 is going to be good for the healthcare business. But I doubt that it's going to be good for the boat business.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, mikewof said:

Public hospitals had closed before this happened, just part of the normal demographic shift.

No, it was part of the privatisation of US health care.  The reason why the response to COVID-19 has been so 4th world and so many are dying.

"Extensive research, herein reviewed, shows that for-profit health institutions provide inferior care at inflated prices. The U.S. experience also demonstrates that market mechanisms nurture unscrupulous medical businesses and undermine medical institutions unable or unwilling to tailor care to profitability. The commercialization of care in the United States has driven up costs by diverting money to profits and by fueling a vast increase in management and financial bureaucracy, which now consumes 31 percent of total health spending. "

55 minutes ago, mikewof said:

If nothing else, SARS-CoV-2 is going to be good for the healthcare business.

Awesome Mikey, that's all you masters are interested in anyway,  Money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Empty hospital beds are expensive. The figures I've seen show the US as having less hospital capacity per capita than the other G7 and developed countries.

I did.  Hospital beds, yeah, we lag  -  but critical care beds, we lead.  Lotta profit in those.

Link to post
Share on other sites