PLAYPEN: Covid-19 Everything Political

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Speaking of clown outfits, I read that Trump has a size 8 foot, but wears a size 12 shoe to accommodate 1 inch lifts. In effect, clown shoes.

Of course, you can't believe everything you read on the internet, so I was wary, but after a good deal of thought I concluded that this is so preposterous nobody could have possibly made it up. I understand Trump had his shoe salesman sign an NDA, so we may never know for certain.

Well, he does have small hands ...

[faberryman]

Well, he does have small hands ...

I refrained from going there.

[Alan Klein]

Speaking of clown outfits, I read that Trump has a size 8 foot, but wears a size 12 shoe to accommodate 1 inch lifts. In effect, clown shoes.

Of course, you can't believe everything you read on the internet, so I was wary, but after a good deal of thought I concluded that this is so preposterous nobody could have possibly made it up. I understand Trump had his shoe salesman sign an NDA, so we may never know for certain.

Trump is 6'3", the tallest president beside Lincoln who was 6'4".  I doubt if he has a size 8 shoe at 6'3".  You really need to get out some and stop watching CNN.

In any case, Melania Trump is a tall 5'11".  And her clothes are impeccable. 

[faberryman]

I doubt if he has a size 8 shoe at 6'3".

No need to post. We all knew you wouldn't believe it.

By the way, Trump didn't become 6'3" until 2017. Before that he had been 6'2". He grew an inch in height because otherwise his Body Mass Index (BMI) would have been over 30, i.e., obese, on his first official physical.  Too bad you can only use that trick once. He has gained weight over the past couple of years, and unable to grow any further in height, is now officially obese. It explains why he has shifted his golfing outfit from khaki pants to dark blue pants. They are more slimming.

In any case, Melania Trump is a tall 5'11".  And her clothes are impeccable. 

I have no idea how tall Melania really is. She always wears those stilettos with 8" heels so she could be almost any height.  Impeccable clothes? I guess if you like the comical fashion runway look. Every time I see an image of her, my first impression is: Yikes! Who dressed her this morning? I will say her clothes are always neatly pressed. I guess anybody's clothes would be neatly pressed if they had someone running behind them all the time with an iron.

[Alan Klein]

No need to post. We all knew you wouldn't believe it.

By the way, Trump didn't become 6'3" until 2017. Before that he had been 6'2". He grew an inch in height because otherwise his Body Mass Index (BMI) would have been over 30, i.e., obese, on his first official physical.  Too bad you can only use that trick once. He has gained weight over the past couple of years, and unable to grow any further in height, is now officially obese. It explains why he has shifted his golfing outfit from khaki pants to dark blue pants. They are more slimming.

I have no idea how tall Melania really is. She always wears those stilettos with 8" heels so she could be almost any height.  Impeccable clothes? I guess if you like the comical fashion runway look. Every time I see an image of her, my first impression is: Yikes! Who dressed her this morning? I will say her clothes are always neatly pressed. I guess anybody's clothes would be neatly pressed if they had someone running behind them all the time with an iron.

Would it hurt that much if you said anything positive about the presidential couple? 

[faberryman]

Would it hurt that much if you said anything positive about the presidential couple?

I am not really a fan of either of them.

[faberryman]

The 32% for America is an annual percentage based on a second quarter of 9.5% if it continued.  The 12%  for ZEuropes is a worse quarterly percentage than America's 9.5%.  Unfortunately, the biased, Trump hating news media tries to make America look worse.  So they mix up the numbers rather than being consistent to make it look worse for the US.  You have to change the media you read if you want to get a different perspective of the truth.

So I should avoid Fox News:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/second-quarter-gdp-plunges-32-9-worst-decline-on-record

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/eu-forecasts-deeper-economic-hit-from-pandemic

The latter links to an article concerning Europe. Nothing about quarter there.

"The 27-nation EU economy is predicted to contract by 8.3% this year, before growing 5.8% in 2021, according to the latest predictions released Tuesday."

As best as I can tell the 32.9% comes from the Commerce Department, so your beef is with Trump's underling Wilbur Ross, not the media. Perhaps the US just hasn't projected a GDP drop for 2020 yet. I'd be procrastinating too.

[Alan Klein]

So I should avoid Fox News:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/second-quarter-gdp-plunges-32-9-worst-decline-on-record

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/eu-forecasts-deeper-economic-hit-from-pandemic

The latter links to an article concerning Europe. Nothing about quarter there.

"The 27-nation EU economy is predicted to contract by 8.3% this year, before growing 5.8% in 2021, according to the latest predictions released Tuesday."

As best as I can tell the 32.9% comes from the Commerce Department, so your beef is with Trump's underling Wilbur Ross, not the media. Perhaps the US just hasn't projected a GDP drop for 2020 yet. I'd be procrastinating too.

The articles you linked to discussed these issues separately.  If you put them together, then the writer should indicate that one percentage is a quarterly and the other is an annual.  Otherwise the reader doesn;t understand the significance of the numbers.

Meanwhile, with all the nastiness here in this thread about America and American stupidity, Germany has a worse decline then the US does.  That's why I said, let's wait until the whole thing is over to see who the smartest before counting your chickens.

[Alan Klein]

So did Sweden make the right call?

Sweden, Which Never Had Lockdown, Sees COVID-19 Cases Plummet as Rest of Europe Suffers Spike
https://www.newsweek.com/sweden-which-never-had-lockdown-sees-covid-19-cases-plummet-rest-europe-suffers-spike-1521626

[Paulo Bizarro]

So did Sweden make the right call?

Sweden, Which Never Had Lockdown, Sees COVID-19 Cases Plummet as Rest of Europe Suffers Spike
https://www.newsweek.com/sweden-which-never-had-lockdown-sees-covid-19-cases-plummet-rest-europe-suffers-spike-1521626

IMO, no. They had 5,000+ deaths and also have economic crisis.

Anyway, I think "plummet" is a tad exagerated:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

So did Sweden make the right call?

Sweden, Which Never Had Lockdown, Sees COVID-19 Cases Plummet as Rest of Europe Suffers Spike
https://www.newsweek.com/sweden-which-never-had-lockdown-sees-covid-19-cases-plummet-rest-europe-suffers-spike-1521626

From the article you linked to yourself:

However, the Scandinavian nation ranks eighth among countries with the highest number of COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people. It outranks the U.S. and Brazil, which are the world's first and second worst-hit nations in terms of total cases, according to Johns Hopkins University.

That should have answered your question. It's NO!

[Ray]

However, the Scandinavian nation ranks eighth among countries with the highest number of COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people. It outranks the U.S. and Brazil, which are the world's first and second worst-hit nations in terms of total cases, according to Johns Hopkins University.

If Sweden ranks eighth among countries with the highest number of COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people, then doesn't that mean there are 7 other countries with higher Covid-19 deaths per 100,000? 

Which are those seven countries, and what did they do to contain the spread of the virus?

[Alan Klein]

If Sweden ranks eighth among countries with the highest number of COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people, then doesn't that mean there are 7 other countries with higher Covid-19 deaths per 100,000? 

Which are those seven countries, and what did they do to contain the spread of the virus?

There you go again Ray being so damn logical. 

[Alan Klein]

From the article you linked to yourself:
That should have answered your question. It's NO!

Bart, The point of the article is that the cases are going down in Sweden rather than up as it is in the rest of Europe.  So maybe Sweden is developing a form of herd immunity that will pay off dividends.  Since this isn't over, you don't know what the total number  of cases will be at the end.    Arguing you won the game in the first quarter is getting ahead of yourself. 

[Robert Roaldi]

Bart, The point of the article is that the cases are going down in Sweden rather than up as it is in the rest of Europe.  So maybe Sweden is developing a form of herd immunity that will pay off dividends.  Since this isn't over, you don't know what the total number  of cases will be at the end.    Arguing you won the game in the first quarter is getting ahead of yourself.

Exactly, it's not over, so any speculation about where Sweden is on the timeline is just thinking out loud. This week you saw some data that supports your view of things and you jump on it. What about the previous (or maybe subsequent) 20 weeks where their numbers did NOT fit your preferred scenario. Wishing that they have achieved "herd immunity" is throwing darts, there have been several posts debunking the idea that anyone anywhere is near herd immunity so why would Sweden have achieved it? This makes zero sense. To achieve herd immunity requires that a large percentage of a population be infected, so this would already be happening in many other countries, but it hasn't, so what's the point of idling wishing that it's happening in Sweden.

[Alan Klein]

Exactly, it's not over, so any speculation about where Sweden is on the timeline is just thinking out loud. This week you saw some data that supports your view of things and you jump on it. What about the previous (or maybe subsequent) 20 weeks where their numbers did NOT fit your preferred scenario. Wishing that they have achieved "herd immunity" is throwing darts, there have been several posts debunking the idea that anyone anywhere is near herd immunity so why would Sweden have achieved it? This makes zero sense. To achieve herd immunity requires that a large percentage of a population be infected, so this would already be happening in many other countries, but it hasn't, so what's the point of idling wishing that it's happening in Sweden.

First, I never said that Sweden's approach is the best.  What I said is that taking different approaches by different countries allow us to see which methods work out best.  But we won't know that until the game is over.  Second, you didn't address why the infection rate is going down now in Sweden and up elsewhere.  Other countries can now catch up and possibly surpass Sweden's total death rate.  We just don't know at this time.  Also, you didn't address the economic effect each method has on the nations' economies.   While you may not feel that matters, others do.  After all, everyone is figuring out how best to open up their societies and we seem to all be making a lot of mistakes.

My whole point is that picking winners and losers in the middle of a game is fraught with risk.  Let's learn from each method.  Maybe one is better than the other or it could be that an in-between approach is best.  It's good that different procedures are being used.  We can learn a lot for the next infection, maybe even this one if it comes back next year in a different strain.

[hogloff]

Bart, The point of the article is that the cases are going down in Sweden rather than up as it is in the rest of Europe.  So maybe Sweden is developing a form of herd immunity that will pay off dividends.  Since this isn't over, you don't know what the total number  of cases will be at the end.    Arguing you won the game in the first quarter is getting ahead of yourself.

You seem to view this epidemic as a contest or a game. It's a world wide disaster.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Bart, The point of the article is that the cases are going down in Sweden rather than up as it is in the rest of Europe.  So maybe Sweden is developing a form of herd immunity that will pay off dividends.

So, maybe you haven't been paying attention?

Sweden only recently started going down, whereas other countries were already down for a while. Those who have been down in the infection ratings for a while, have been reopening their economy by relaxing the restrictions, and as anticipated that made the number of infections go up again, to a degree. But now there is a much better grasp on how to control the outbreaks, and they are unlikely to overwhelm the ICUs.

We're all far far away from achieving herd immunity. Things will be getting worse everywhere in a few months because there is no vaccine yet, and people are too impatient to stick to the proven concept of social distancing (or masks if distancing is not possible) and personal hygiene (handwashing with soap and disinfection).

[hogloff]

First, I never said that Sweden's approach is the best.  What I said is that taking different approaches by different countries allow us to see which methods work out best.  But we won't know that until the game is over.  Second, you didn't address why the infection rate is going down now in Sweden and up elsewhere.  Other countries can now catch up and possibly surpass Sweden's total death rate.  We just don't know at this time.  Also, you didn't address the economic effect each method has on the nations' economies.   While you may not feel that matters, others do.  After all, everyone is figuring out how best to open up their societies and we seem to all be making a lot of mistakes.

My whole point is that picking winners and losers in the middle of a game is fraught with risk.  Let's learn from each method.  Maybe one is better than the other or it could be that an in-between approach is best.  It's good that different procedures are being used.  We can learn a lot for the next infection, maybe even this one if it comes back next year in a different strain.

Rather than look at Sweden which has many deaths for its population, why not look at Vietnam or Thailand which have very few deaths and seem to have faired very well from an economic standpoint.

[Alan Klein]

So, maybe you haven't been paying attention?

Sweden only recently started going down, whereas other countries were already down for a while. Those who have been down in the infection ratings for a while, have been reopening their economy by relaxing the restrictions, and as anticipated that made the number of infections go up again, to a degree. But now there is a much better grasp on how to control the outbreaks, and they are unlikely to overwhelm the ICUs.

We're all far far away from achieving herd immunity. Things will be getting worse everywhere in a few months because there is no vaccine yet, and people are too impatient to stick to the proven concept of social distancing (or masks if distancing is not possible) and personal hygiene (handwashing with soap and disinfection).

You're not Swedish.  Mind your business.  Their virologist decided this was the best method for them.  Are you smarter than their experts      Maybe their methods are better in the end.  We won't know until the disease has passed.