OT: Coronavirus XXVI: Keep Bickering to a Minimum

[GMofOilers]

Yes, I understand what you mean, and I'm on your side in this. But my point is that there is a younger demo in the ICU now( not young, but younger). Makes sense since most of those that catch it these days seem to be of the younger vintage. But it also backs up your point that less of these patients in the ICU are dying since they are indeed younger, stronger, etc. And for sure it is tough to compare because last spring we simply didn't have a lot of cases, period, nor a lot of testing yet.

There's been a total of 228 patients in ICU since the start 7.5 months.

To date, 14 patients under the age of 29 have been to ICU, so not sure what your considering younger?
11 patients from 30 to 39
24 patients from 40 to 49

If you add up those number with comorbidities 1 or more, the numbers even shrink more.

All the info is on the covid alberta stats page.

I can apply some right now
As of Friday 37312 covid positives to date, 1325 hospitalized, 228 ICU, 398 dead in 7.5 months
972 of the 1325 hospitalized were over the age of 50.
179 of the 228 ICU were over the age of 50.
391 of the 398 deaths were over the age of 50, with 264 of them being over 80

This plandemic is doing just as it was designed to do, freak people out.

 

[PerformanceMcOil]

I have no idea how much inflation will occur or when the full ramifications of increasing the money supply will be realized, but it is basic economics that increasing the supply of something will eventually decrease its value.

You can argue that creating a bunch of new money and distributing it to those that needed it during the pandemic was indeed the best course of action, sure. But everyone who didn't get a piece of the pie had their own savings devalued, whether they realize it or not. There's no way around that fact.

It's not that simple. If the value of the currency is stable globally, then that is one deflationary pressure removed, and there is no loss of value relative to other currency's. An increased in domestic money supply could increase inflation domestically, if more people are willing/able to spend more money on goods. But, giving billions of 'printed' money to a billionaire, isn't going to change what the grocery store is able to charge for produce, regardless of the change in the overall money supply.

I'm not arguing against the overall premise - that increased money supply would tend to decrease the value of that money. But I do argue that there are so many other factors at work, and that ultimately - as long as there is demand for Canadian currency - it is not likely to cause runaway inflation, or maybe even noticeable inflation. Other people receiving money only makes you poorer in an absolute sense if the people receiving that money are competing for the same goods and services you are. However, the money coming in is (in theory) going to people that once were able to pay for things, but then became unemployed/unable to pay for things. They have only maintained their competition with you (assuming you received no money), not increased it.

 

[Ritchie Valens]

Great news, only concern is that the sample size is so small on both of them, based on less than 100 infected people each.

Yes, 30,000 participants in stage 3 testing isn't any cause to celebrate just yet but with 94.5% efficiency in Moderna is a pretty high bar to step down from in a larger scale study. If their target was just 50% effectiveness (set by I think either the WHO or CDC) but can achieve 80% in a larger phase iv study, I think we're well on our way to having an approved vaccine in the near future.

Getting it mass produced and ensuring it is properly stored while in transit and in storage (-75 F for Pfizer's!), will be another story. Have you heard what Moderna's safe storage temp is? I can't seem to find it to compare to Moderna's.

 

[Little Fury]

The government paying you 60k + benefits vs. the government paying you $2k/month on EI for the same economic benefit to the city/province/country, it looks like the $2k is a better use of my tax dollars.

In what world does someone squeaking by at $24K a year provide the same economic impact as someone making more than twice that?

 

[GMofOilers]

Yes, 30,000 participants in stage 3 testing isn't any cause to celebrate just yet but with 94.5% efficiency in Moderna is a pretty high bar to step down from in a larger scale study. If their target was just 50% effectiveness (set by I think either the WHO or CDC) but can achieve 80% in a larger phase iv study, I think we're well on our way to having an approved vaccine in the near future.

Getting it mass produced and ensuring it is properly stored while in transit and in storage (-75 F for Pfizer's!), will be another story. Have you heard what Moderna's safe storage temp is? I can't seem to find it to compare to Moderna's.

Storage temp for 30 days in Refrigerators temp is what I read this morning, will try and find the link.

 

[Raab]

Nice meme. Do you know what would have happened if nothing like CERB was ever put into place? Try venturing a guess.

There would have been massive defaults, resulting in the rich and banks being hit hard. Consumers would have been declaring bankruptcies. Basically a total reset of the bubble built by the central bank. In the end young people may have been able to afford a house on one income, car values would have come down, and the economy would have rebounded.

 

[Nostradumbass]

In what world does someone squeaking by at $24K a year provide the same economic impact as someone making more than twice that?

If the job isn't providing economic benefit and it's all being funded by the taxpayer, that money can go to better uses.

 

[Raab]

The Central Bank does not really control long term interest rates. They can control short term rates in ways that vary somewhat from country to country. The Fed, which is really the big dog, has direct control of the Fed's fund rate and the discount rate. The discount rate is short term so it's not going to be much of a lever anything further out on the curve. In Canada the analog is teh Policy rate which is again a short term tool. As I suspect you are hinting at they are focused on short term inflaation targets. Quanitaive easing can have an additive effect on short term and medium term bonds and some impact in the oposite direction on longer bonds.

I am not sure what your point is. Is this spending inflationary. Yes. But at this point that is not necessarily a bad thing. Are we looking at huge inflationary pressuress from covid spending? Not that I can see. This wasn't some huge stimulous package to juice an already heated economy. It was a short term life line to prevent the economy from completely collapsing.

The bank lowers the interest rate by printing money and buying short term bonds putting money into the system until the interest rate drops to where they want it. So when you hear they're dropping interest rates, that means they're adding to the money supply, when they're raising interest rates they're subtracting from the money supply.

 

[Raab]

In what world does someone squeaking by at $24K a year provide the same economic impact as someone making more than twice that?

If the second person is working for government then thats easy. As I've already explained to you the private sector pays for everything. So the 24k a year employee will add at least that in economic value or else the private business wouldn't have hired them. The 48k a year government employee negates the 24k in economic activity the 24k a year employee had, and now puts you into a deficit of 24k in terms of economic benefit. This is not rocket science.

 

[Little Fury]

If the job isn't providing economic benefit and it's all being funded by the taxpayer, that money can go to better uses.

That doesn't answer the question, not does it magically create jobs for people who no longer have them because theirs was deemed as not providing any economic benefit (by whatever voodoo you choose to measure such things).

 

[Little Fury]

If the second person is working for government then thats easy. As I've already explained to you the private sector pays for everything.

Yeah you've claimed that. It's not true though.

So the 24k a year employee will add at least that in economic value or else the private business wouldn't have hired them. The 48k a year government employee negates the 24k in economic activity the 24k a year employee had, and now puts you into a deficit of 24k in terms of economic benefit. This is not rocket science.

You're not even following the discussion. It's not about a 60K government worker vs a 24K private sector employee: it's a bout a 60K government worker vs a person making 24K on EI.

 

[Raab]

Yeah you've claimed that. It's not true though.

O, and how is it not true?

 

[bone]

If the second person is working for government then thats easy. As I've already explained to you the private sector pays for everything. So the 24k a year employee will add at least that in economic value or else the private business wouldn't have hired them. The 48k a year government employee negates the 24k in economic activity the 24k a year employee had, and now puts you into a deficit of 24k in terms of economic benefit. This is not rocket science.

Tax payers pay for everything. Not the private sector.

Your comments ignore the fact the 24K example was the person you just laid off who was providing a service now collecting EI and providing nothing for the 24K the taxpayers are contributing to them. Let alone the loss of tax revenue from this individual to help pay for some of these services.

 

[Little Fury]

O, and how is it not true?

Because private industry itself depends on public goods provided by the state to generate economic activity.

The irony of this argument taking place against the backdrop of news of two promising COVID vaccines that were made possible through massive injections of government money is not lost on me.

 

[Stoneman89]

There's been a total of 228 patients in ICU since the start 7.5 months.

To date, 14 patients under the age of 29 have been to ICU, so not sure what your considering younger?
11 patients from 30 to 39
24 patients from 40 to 49

If you add up those number with comorbidities 1 or more, the numbers even shrink more.

All the info is on the covid alberta stats page.

I can apply some right now
As of Friday 37312 covid positives to date, 1325 hospitalized, 228 ICU, 398 dead in 7.5 months
972 of the 1325 hospitalized were over the age of 50.
179 of the 228 ICU were over the age of 50.
391 of the 398 deaths were over the age of 50, with 264 of them being over 80

This plandemic is doing just as it was designed to do, freak people out.

Younger is not people in seniors homes for sure, and likely those under 60.

Can you check on the % of people in ICU under the age of 50 in April compared to November please.

 

[bone]

Younger is not people in seniors homes for sure, and likely those under 60.

Can you check on the % of people in ICU under the age of 50 in April compared to November please.

I don't think that's obtainable through the Alberta site as it shows only cumulative for the age groups. That said, the ICU rate for 40-49 is 0.4%, 30-39 is 0.2% and every other age group below 50 is either 0.1% or 0%. Overall under 50 is 0.18% and having looked at it throughout the process, I don't think the percentages have changed much. Hard numbers are going up for ICU (even for people under 50) but it still seems proportional to the overall number of cases.

As for total ICU, the first peak was in April at about 22. There was a second peak in August at about 21 before dropping again. The recent spike surpassed 22 only a couple weeks ago on October 29 and has surged to 54. Tough to say where it settles, but the slope is still pretty steep.

 

[Stoneman89]

Yes, 30,000 participants in stage 3 testing isn't any cause to celebrate just yet but with 94.5% efficiency in Moderna is a pretty high bar to step down from in a larger scale study. If their target was just 50% effectiveness (set by I think either the WHO or CDC) but can achieve 80% in a larger phase iv study, I think we're well on our way to having an approved vaccine in the near future.

Getting it mass produced and ensuring it is properly stored while in transit and in storage (-75 F for Pfizer's!), will be another story. Have you heard what Moderna's safe storage temp is? I can't seem to find it to compare to Moderna's.

Minus 20 (typical freezer temp) for up to 6 months, and refridgerator temp for up to 30 days. Pfizer was minus 70 for storage and transportation.

 

[LTIR]

No prob. Not sure what that doctor was going on about the cases getting "worse." More of them? For sure. Let's hope she was just "misquoted."

We should demand cameras in ICUs just so HfOil can confirm if cases are getting worse or not. Need more data in puke viscosity and phlegm amount. Maybe they are just faking it or the doc is lieing to make it seem like things are bad.

The docs probably are just chilling in their lunch rooms in front of big screen TVs watching how globally things aren't bad.

 

[Stoneman89]

We should demand cameras in ICUs just so HfOil can confirm if cases are getting worse or not. Need more data in puke viscosity and phlegm amount. Maybe they are just faking it or the doc is living to make it seem like things are bad.

The docs probably are just chilling in their lunch rooms in front of big screen TVs watching how globally things aren't bad.

Nice try on the sarcasm, but the point isn't the number of cases but whether the cases themselves have suddenly turned worse in quality. I suspect she was referring to volume. I'm only going by what a front line worker like my wife tells me. It's important these days for those with knowledge to provide clear information to the public, so people like yourself don't jump to conclusions like you just did.

 

[bone]

Nice try on the sarcasm, but the point isn't the number of cases but whether the cases themselves have suddenly turned worse in quality. I suspect she was referring to volume. I'm only going by what a front line worker like my wife tells me. It's important these days for those with knowledge to provide clear information to the public, so people like yourself don't jump to conclusions like you just did.

I suspect it's a misquote or a form of hyperbole and that the overall environment is much worse rather than the cases themself being worse. Considering the case load in ICU has more than doubled in two weeks, and the number of outbreaks happening in hospitals overall, I could understand someone's perception of that, but without better data, I'd trust your wifes opinion until we see something more.

Another consideration is that with the hospital outbreaks the ICU cases may be more examples of people with co-morbidities which would definitely give the perception that it is worse.

Sample sizes being what they are, you could also see that randomness making one ICU unit vs. another experience worse cases.

 

[GretzkytoKurri9917]

Today's #COVID19AB update has been delayed until 4:30pm. Thank you for your patience.

 

[LTIR]

Nice try on the sarcasm, but the point isn't the number of cases but whether the cases themselves have suddenly turned worse in quality. I suspect she was referring to volume. I'm only going by what a front line worker like my wife tells me. It's important these days for those with knowledge to provide clear information to the public, so people like yourself don't jump to conclusions like you just did.

Why would someone be admitted to ICU if the "quality" as you put it isn't top notch? Does you wife work in ICU dealing with families of sick n deceased?
There were 24 top quality cases in Alberta 2 weeks ago and currently that number of tier 1 folks is over 50.
It is volume as you put it but it's volume in ICU for patients needing intensive care.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Nice try on the sarcasm, but the point isn't the number of cases but whether the cases themselves have suddenly turned worse in quality. I suspect she was referring to volume. I'm only going by what a front line worker like my wife tells me. It's important these days for those with knowledge to provide clear information to the public, so people like yourself don't jump to conclusions like you just did.

The poster is purposely using the most ridiculous strawman argument. and does that typically. I called that out and now poster just shifted to you, now back to me, around we go..

 

[bellagiobob]

Yes, 30,000 participants in stage 3 testing isn't any cause to celebrate just yet but with 94.5% efficiency in Moderna is a pretty high bar to step down from in a larger scale study. If their target was just 50% effectiveness (set by I think either the WHO or CDC) but can achieve 80% in a larger phase iv study, I think we're well on our way to having an approved vaccine in the near future.

Getting it mass produced and ensuring it is properly stored while in transit and in storage (-75 F for Pfizer's!), will be another story. Have you heard what Moderna's safe storage temp is? I can't seem to find it to compare to Moderna's.

My issue isn't the 30K participants, it's that of those 30K, less than 100 in each study have so far got infected, and that's what they are basing the 90%+ effectiveness on, the 100 or so infected people, which is a really small sample size.

 

[BigFuzzyDice]

Especially since public service workers aren't themselves taxpayers, right?

The public sector does not actually pay taxes, they are simply tax recyclers. Honestly they may as well not even pay an income tax and just slash their pay by the appropriate percentages, save on the administration costs , plus it would remove the facade that they somehow are contributing to the overall net income of the country. tax revenue only comes from creating added value via private enterprise.