COVID-19 Manitoba

[Luisito]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

I also think your way over blowing what this virus can do. It has the potential to be lethal for some, but to over huge majority of people who contract it, it's not a major thing. Small proportion of cases that may have severe effects or require hospitalization. How many people do you expect will be hospitalized at one time anyways? I'm sick of this war mongering pussyfooting approach adopted by many.

It has already overwhelmed health care systems in other places. What makes you think that can't happen here?

Yes the economy is important but that fact people on here are dismissing human life so easily is disgusting.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Luisito

It has already overwhelmed health care systems in other places. What makes you think that can't happen here?

Yes the economy is important but that fact people on here are dismissing human life so easily is disgusting.

I get what you're saying, but we shouldn't necessarily be dismissive of people who are concerned about the impact this is all having on the economy either. A brutally depressed economy will also generate vast amounts of human misery, suffering and death. Particularly if the government's ability to provide for people out of work is overwhelmed.

Public health and safety is quite rightly the immediate priority, but there has to be some regard for the long term impact of what's happening now.

[EdwardTH]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Dude, if we stay in for 18 months, that unemployment rate is gonna be more like 50%, maybe higher.

I also think your way over blowing what this virus can do. It has the potential to be lethal for some, but to over huge majority of people who contract it, it's not a major thing. Small proportion of cases that may have severe effects or require hospitalization. How many people do you expect will be hospitalized at one time anyways? I'm sick of this war mongering pussyfooting approach adopted by many. This is gonna suck, but it will particularly suck in the long term if we destroy the economy.

And no shit there are those who have a bigger vulnerability. If you feel that you're at risk, you have the choice to stay home, but we can't keep people inside indefinitely, especially not when this isnt like the plague and is more of a coin flip to survive if you catch it.

I don't think that at documented levels of fatality that this would produce the kind of blow to the economy that you're suggesting since you bring it up.

Ah good to see this forum is still the sick right-wing garbage it usually is. Some things stay the same. "I don't think the tens of thousands of fatalities caused would affect the economy enough for it to be a big deal".......

Obviously you have no loved ones who work in healthcare. I'd ask you to try to imagine what an unmitigated outbreak would do to them but you can't. I doubt you've had a day in your life where you worked as hard as ER staff do every single day, even pre-covid.

Generations before us dealt with things like wars and drafts. Everyone had loved ones overseas for years. Industry lost a huge portion of their workforce, for years. Unprecedented gov't spending on the war effort, for years. It's probably worth noting that without mitigation the covid death toll in Canada would easily surpass our WW2 casualties of 40k. They put their boots on and got it done, and moved on. You've been asked to work from home and stop going to restaurants for 3 weeks and you're already pooping your panties. Don't be so damn soft. Time to put on your big boy pants.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by Danny D Oh

The problem is that community spread is still really limited. If we "get on with it" we are going to continually have localized outbreaks like NYC, they will just happen faster with more travel and contact. Our hospitals in a local sense will be overrun but if this happens in many locations at once the resources of the whole country will be overrun.

There's a false sense of security given the measures that were taken. The issue becomes that we have very, very low immunity. At this point an extremely small piece of the population has immunity having had the virus and recovered. Until we have a mass of testing to see who has antibodies or a vaccine that we can produces billions of copies of, or hopefully both, anything resembling normal won't happen.

As a for instance, going back to NHL, NBA, NFL, MLB, CFL operating...tens of thousands of fans in tight quarters, hundreds of players and team personnel travelling all over the continent. That can't be happening until there's broad immunity.

Ya I don't think we'll see any sort of large gatherings like that for some time. Cancel the NHL/NBA season's. CFL likely cancelled. MLB should be delayed if not cancelled. Next NHL/NBA/NFL season likely delayed.

My point was, we need to start relaxing restrictions at some time. The Province indicated be prepared for social distancing until July/August. So that seems to be the time frame we can all expect when things will start being relaxed.

And 100% when that happens we will see a rise in cases.

[Festivus]

People who say it is a binary choice (health vs economy) are missing a key factor: With massive death comes a worse economy. If we loosen all restrictions and go back to normal, there will be wave after wave of death, and the medical system will be completely underwater the entire time. This will have a huge effect on economic activity as people die, take time off, fear going into work, etc.

[Festivus]

Government of Canada has released their official (current) projections: https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/ph...inform-eng.pdf

Best Case Scenario (hold restrictions): 11,000 - 22,000 dead
Medium Case Scenario (loosen restrictions some): 100,000 - 200,000 dead
Worst Case Scenario (eliminate restrictions): 300,000 - 350,000 dead

[Biff]

Well I like this chart - the Green (recovered) is starting to encroach on the infected.



Jacques Marcoux@jacquesmarcoux Twitter

[dmacc]

I like charts

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by EdwardTH

Ah good to see this forum is still the sick right-wing garbage it usually is. Some things stay the same. "I don't think the tens of thousands of fatalities caused would affect the economy enough for it to be a big deal".......

Obviously you have no loved ones who work in healthcare. I'd ask you to try to imagine what an unmitigated outbreak would do to them but you can't. I doubt you've had a day in your life where you worked as hard as ER staff do every single day, even pre-covid.

Generations before us dealt with things like wars and drafts. Everyone had loved ones overseas for years. Industry lost a huge portion of their workforce, for years. Unprecedented gov't spending on the war effort, for years. It's probably worth noting that without mitigation the covid death toll in Canada would easily surpass our WW2 casualties of 40k. They put their boots on and got it done, and moved on. You've been asked to work from home and stop going to restaurants for 3 weeks and you're already pooping your panties. Don't be so damn soft. Time to put on your big boy pants.

Oh yeah, the health care workers are doing a good job, fine.

But it's kind of cold comfort for the millions of people that could lose everything to say, "well at least you're alive", after destroying their livelihoods, futures, and probably the futures of their children.

Also anyone trying to project what the death toll would be without mitigation is talking out of their ass. Our data set is incomplete, and (to be crystal clear), most of the early projections were based on INCORRECT assumptions.

Glad to see people are so easily herded into submission.

[esquire]

Well, those Government of Canada charts certainly lay out the stakes here in very stark terms.

I'd be curious to know where we are right now in terms of the level of epidemic controls right now. I'm assuming we are in the stronger control zone, although not quite at the far left end of the chart, i.e. the Wuhan-style lockdowns.

[Festivus]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Also anyone trying to project what the death toll would be without mitigation is talking out of their ass. Our data set is incomplete, and (to be crystal clear), most of the early projections were based on INCORRECT assumptions.

Glad to see people are so easily herded into submission.

Do you have any studies/data that contradict the current 2%+ mortality rate for Canadian cases, or the overall 0.6% mortality rate for best-case scenarios like Korea?

[roccerfeller]

One of the issues is how virulent this virus is, as well as how latent the virus can be before it starts spreading. This is not the flu. It spreads and infects at a very high rate, even if you're asymptomatic you can still be a carrier and pass the effect on, and if you don't enforce social isolation in the absence of a vaccine, then its all a moot point because an outbreak will simply occur, be they secondary, tertiary infectious waves, and then we'll be back at square one or worse.

We, individually and collectively, do not have immunity to it, so talk of "just get out there and get infected" to build immunity is not how it works. I don't mean to ridicule those sentiments but they are incorrect. Among a lengthy myriad of factors such as viral load, the take away is that everyone will react differently, which is why you have healthy young adults dying from it and older people with multiple comorbidities recovering.

This is a global pandemic, even if people were able to go back to work and Canada had zero cases, other economies have been affected such that their own isolation procedures would still affect our economy as well as the global companies that employ others.

[GarryEllice]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

But it's kind of cold comfort for the millions of people that could lose everything to say, "well at least you're alive", after destroying their livelihoods, futures, and probably the futures of their children.

This is ridiculously over-the-top. All we've done is hit the pause button. There is no permanent structural change to the economy. Our children's futures have not been destroyed.

Fast forward 18 months. Assume that there's an effective covid-19 vaccine and most of the population is now immune, and social distancing is over. At that point, what's the obstacle to an economic recovery? Who are the people whose livelihoods you expect to be permanently destroyed? Which jobs do you expect to disappear and never come back?

[Festivus]

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

This is ridiculously over-the-top. All we've done is hit the pause button. There is no permanent structural change to the economy. Our children's futures have not been destroyed.

Fast forward 18 months. Assume that there's an effective covid-19 vaccine and most of the population is now immune, and social distancing is over. At that point, what's the obstacle to an economic recovery? Who are the people whose livelihoods you expect to be permanently destroyed? Which jobs do you expect to disappear and never come back?

I agree with you, but there certainly will be some major changes. For one, we are going to likely see a generation of lost small businesses. There will also likely be major changes around the way people are allowed to work from home for office jobs. But you are correct, in general there is nothing stopping a bounce-back for the economy as a whole once the pandemic is over.

[cheswick]

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

This is ridiculously over-the-top. All we've done is hit the pause button. There is no permanent structural change to the economy. Our children's futures have not been destroyed.

Fast forward 18 months. Assume that there's an effective covid-19 vaccine and most of the population is now immune, and social distancing is over. At that point, what's the obstacle to an economic recovery? Who are the people whose livelihoods you expect to be permanently destroyed? Which jobs do you expect to disappear and never come back?

As ridiculously over the top as his statement was, yours is equally ridiculous in the other direction. This is not just a pause for many businesses. This is full stop. There will be a lot of business causalities from this economic downturn that will never recover. I've read a study that said a quarter of small business will go under with a one month pause. One can only imagine if it's far longer than that. And yes other businesses will fill the gaps eventually but its not like it'll happen the day everything is opened up. It'll take years.

[Festivus]

Originally Posted by djforsberg

Isn't this the point of recessions that capitalism allows? Isn't this a feature of the system and not a bug? To weed out the weak businesses that can't survive tough times? (despite the largest, "too-big-to-fail" corporations getting bailouts, allowing them to swallow up the smaller ones) At what point do we decide that perhaps we need a less fragile and a more balanced, robust economic system so that this doesn't keep happening every 10 (or fewer) years?

I agree with you that our current market system favours business over people (and rewards risk too much with bailouts), but the coming depression is the fault of the pandemic, not the weak financial state the economy was in leading up to it (in terms of over-leveraging, etc).

Just as we can't blame people for not being able to survive 6+ months with no income, we can't blame businesses, either.

I do agree that there should normally not be bailouts, especially for investment vehicles such as rental properties.

[GarryEllice]

Originally Posted by cheswick

As ridiculously over the top as his statement was, yours is equally ridiculous in the other direction. This is not just a pause for many businesses. This is full stop. There will be a lot of business causalities from this economic downturn that will never recover. I've read a study that said a quarter of small business will go under with a one month pause. One can only imagine if it's far longer than that. And yes other businesses will fill the gaps eventually but its not like it'll happen the day everything is opened up. It'll take years.

I'm assuming, maybe naively, that the government will provide support to small businesses to prevent massive casualties. It makes no sense to allow thousands of businesses to disappear due to a temporary, self-imposed reduction in activity. This is not an ordinary economic downtown; it's more like an induced coma. The normal rules don't apply. But maybe I'm overly optimistic...

[YWG-RO]

MB 224, 3 deaths, 5 ICU.
Canada 21 k, 509 deaths.

Must admit, going better than I expected. Hopefully we can continue this without completely derailing the economy.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by GarryEllice

I'm assuming, maybe naively, that the government will provide support to small businesses to prevent massive casualties. It makes no sense to allow thousands of businesses to disappear due to a temporary, self-imposed reduction in activity. This is not an ordinary economic downtown; it's more like an induced coma. The normal rules don't apply. But maybe I'm overly optimistic...

Well that works for a short while, but you have to consider that all these places don't magically get to stop paying bills, neither do they usually have huge amounts of cash on hand to keep them alive for a prolonged shutdown. These businesses have a cash flow problem, a really big one. And it's not just small businesses, large ones will experience serious trouble too, which is why there's all this bailout talk, especially in the states.

So while I agree that it doesn't make sense that thousands of small businesses can just be allowed to disappear, the longer the shutdown, the more likely, and the reality is that we don't have enough cash to keep floating these businesses indefinitely, or very long at all really, before we start creating massive long term economic headaches.

We're going to reach a crossroads very soon, maybe we already have, where we have to be realistic about what the consequences are of keeping people home. This is undoubtedly the biggest shock to the economy in modern history.

[Danny D Oh]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

Dude, if we stay in for 18 months, that unemployment rate is gonna be more like 50%, maybe higher.

I also think your way over blowing what this virus can do. It has the potential to be lethal for some, but to over huge majority of people who contract it, it's not a major thing. Small proportion of cases that may have severe effects or require hospitalization. How many people do you expect will be hospitalized at one time anyways? I'm sick of this war mongering pussyfooting approach adopted by many. This is gonna suck, but it will particularly suck in the long term if we destroy the economy.

And no shit there are those who have a bigger vulnerability. If you feel that you're at risk, you have the choice to stay home, but we can't keep people inside indefinitely, especially not when this isnt like the plague and is more of a coin flip to survive if you catch it.

I don't think that at documented levels of fatality that this would produce the kind of blow to the economy that you're suggesting since you bring it up.

There are obvious vulnerabilities (diabetes, hypertension, asthma) and there are many, many people who have no idea they are vulnerable to the severe complications and potentially death from this virus. This virus is entering the pulmonary system of many young adults through a genetic difference in some people that affects the ACE2 enzyme receptor, enzyme found in cells in the lungs and heart. Second largest group dying and having serious complications in the US are ages 20-44.

The damage to the economy is overstated IMO. The economy is shifting to the necessary measures in terms of distancing. There's a huge spike in demand in some areas of retail while other areas have gone dormant. Where I live there are literally hundreds of job postings. We're in an adjustment period. We will have higher unemployment than we've been used to the past couple decades. I see it running long-term at 10-15% until this pandemic runs its course.

The bigger economic issue is going to be holding on to the old way...that's a comment both related to the pandemic and idiotic policy by the current government in Alberta and to some extent in Ottawa that is chasing away tech jobs and trying to revive oil.