Message from @Sophie
Discord ID: 685548223909199968
Honestly if you think this is all going to just blow over and be cool, you have not been paying attention to the numbers coming out of the WHO
There are about 925k staffed hospital beds in the US
If there’s a 40% transmission rate
That’s problem for sure. The supply shock will come from those who need those hospital beds, plus all the additional people who don’t need a hospital stay but have to miss work
With a 19% hospitalization rate (per WHO)
That’s 24.8m hospitalizations
Does a 40% transmission rate mean that 40% of people will get the virus?
Total hospital admissions in a year in the US are about 36m
Yes
Admittedly bombastic title but:
So there are 159 million full- and part-time workers in the US. So that’s 63.6 million sick workers. Granted, it’s likely that they won’t all be sick at the same time, but that’s going to have an economic effect
And people staying home and not patronizing those businesses
40-70% is the projected infection rate
69% increase in hospital utilization
So conservatively like $125bn in hospital costs?
Probably closer to 200bn
The raw averages say 248bn
@Sophie Have you not seen the jobs report?
Coronavirus shouldn't impact the economy much
You mean the jobs report from when there wasn’t coronavirus?
Honestly, I don’t know why you’re clinging to this as a partisan issue
Obviously this is going to impact the economy
The fed cut rates in preparation, Trump is considering tax relief
The government certainly thinks it’s going to affect the economy
Job reports from last month?
We’re not looking at last month, we’re looking towards next month
Possibly a slow down, but still the impact wouldn't be "much"
I was expecting a slowdown in the jobs report but we didn't see it, which changed my views.
February won't reflect the impact of COVID. We'll see the impacts going forward.
But believe what you want to believe. This is unprecedented so we don't know anything. Time will tell.
It's also a matter of what you consider "much"
A million American dead is only 1/3 of 1% of the population. Not much. Unless you're one of them or a loved one is.
Considering this virus has a very low death rate, I doubt it will be in the millions.
It's 6% from confirmed resolved cases, that's a potentially huge amount of deaths; it is not like the flu's .1% average death rate. If you have hundreds of millions of infected, then that still leaves millions of deaths, which is extremely bad regardless of the percentage itself being low. And because the virus is so infectious the concern of it infecting a majority of the global population has been brought up as a possibility (Prof. Gabriel Leung, chair of public health medicine at Hong Kong university).
Yes, but the death rate among all cases is closer to .5 or .6% if you look at very high testing situations
But i agree we don’t really know.
You're drawing from the formula of total cases vs deaths. Using all cases, including active ones, to calculate the death rate is practically useless because the formula is inherently flawed; people who have just gotten the virus or are still within the symptomatic stage are going to either recover or die eventually, but preemptively counting them in with recoveries will obviously skew results. South Korea is a country that has very good testing for the virus now, and as a result the proportion of total cases vs deaths has become more extreme (7,041 vs 48, or .6%). The number of recoveries vs deaths, however, is 118 vs 48, so you would use the total resolved cases and divide the deaths with it to get 28.9%; this is their current death rate. Deaths divided by the total amount of resolved cases is the most accurate way we have to determine a death rate for a virus, undocumented cases notwithstanding (which are probably significantly higher than recorded ones).
When counting all resolved cases worldwide, the death rate has been a firm 6% for upwards of two weeks now.
Death rate is also not the only important factor to consider