Mega-Thread: Democratic 2020 Primaries

[Rogue Karl]

Would be easier to handle it wasn’t that it would be perfect but you don’t need 20k ventilators in a state using 3k. So concentrate them where the worst outbreak is.

I think he issue is that it hasn't really started yet. With some cases taking up to thirty days to show symptoms its exceedingly difficult to tell when and where thing will be needed.

[tromage2]

Trump has more blood on his hands right now, then OJ. It will exponentially worse each week.

Yeah and if you would had been president 0 ppl would die by corona....
Every world leader is then a mass murderer in your eyes what about stepping up yourself then and be jezus and save everybody, otherwise just have a little bit more respect to the ppl that trying their best to solve this crisis. You can do a better job? then do it!

[Draco-Onis]

Yeah and if you would had been president 0 ppl would die by corona....
Every world leader is then a mass murderer in your eyes what about stepping up yourself then and be jezus and save everybody, otherwise just have a little bit more respect to the ppl that trying their best to solve this crisis. You can do a better job? then do it!

No one is saying that but look at the countries that have it under control, all the world leaders that failed to take this seriously and do everything they could to save lives have blood on their hands. Trump is creating Italy 2.0 right here in the US due to being reactive instead of proactive heck Italy's leaders at least had the brains to lock down the entire country when they saw that they were failing. At the moment the majority of states aren't on lock down even though the virus is in all 50 states.

[JohnBrown1917]

Yeah and if you would had been president 0 ppl would die by corona....
Every world leader is then a mass murderer in your eyes what about stepping up yourself then and be jezus and save everybody, otherwise just have a little bit more respect to the ppl that trying their best to solve this crisis. You can do a better job? then do it!

Trump's 'blood' has nothing to do with Corona. And yeah, most world leaders are war criminals.

[Bodakane]

Yeah and if you would had been president 0 ppl would die by corona....
Every world leader is then a mass murderer in your eyes what about stepping up yourself then and be jezus and save everybody, otherwise just have a little bit more respect to the ppl that trying their best to solve this crisis. You can do a better job? then do it!

A lot less people would be dead if he had spent the first few months prepping for this instead of calling it a hoax. These are simple and verifiable facts.

Most of us here are inoculated against your spoon-fed propaganda.

[Endus]

Head here, start clicking through a few countries and you'll pretty quickly notice that it's the same ~3 day doubling trajectory across Italy, Spain, Germany, UK, USA, France, Netherlands. Maybe Switzerland is doing a bit better, but basically everywhere else is bumping into the same thing. Critiquing that is fine and sensible, but thinking that the American response is uniquely bad just isn't consistent with what we're seeing - pretty much every country outside of China and Korea are showing the same pattern and the main differences come down to population density rather than policy.

The issue is that this really isn't the case, with the USA. Here's the most-informative graph I've found for tracking this; it places each line's origin from the time of the first infection identified, so you get a solid comparison between the rate of infection across nations where the outbreak first appeared at different dates. Countries with longer lines have had a longer time dealing with the virus;



South Korea's initial pace was similar to others, and then flattened, hard.

The USA's was always on the higher end, and was doubling every 2 days, not 3. That slowed slightly starting about a week ago, but it's still north of doubling every 2.5 days. It's the highest extant infection rate in the developed world. It's starting to flatten, but it's starting later than most countries, and still hasn't lowered itself to most countries' pre-flattening rates, even.

Sure, we can question the numbers from some countries, like China, but that really won't make the USA's failure here any more acceptable.

[d00mGuArD]

The USA's was always on the higher end, and was doubling every 2 days, not 3. That slowed slightly starting about a week ago, but it's still north of doubling every 2.5 days. It's the highest extant infection rate in the developed world. It's starting to flatten, but it's starting later than most countries, and still hasn't lowered itself to most countries' pre-flattening rates, even..

This can be because the tests started later and all the results are coming in more concetrated affecting the curve.
I don't know if it is, but it very well can be.

[Endus]

This can be because the tests started later and all the results are coming in more concetrated affecting the curve.
I don't know if it is, but it very well can be.

Only if there was a significant unchecked outbreak to begin with before testing began, in the USA, and that itself is a failure that was not repeated in other nations. Even Italy and Spain have better handles on the outbreak than the USA has.

[Spectral]

The issue is that this really isn't the case, with the USA. Here's the most-informative graph I've found for tracking this; it places each line's origin from the time of the first infection identified, so you get a solid comparison between the rate of infection across nations where the outbreak first appeared at different dates. Countries with longer lines have had a longer time dealing with the virus;



South Korea's initial pace was similar to others, and then flattened, hard.

The USA's was always on the higher end, and was doubling every 2 days, not 3. That slowed slightly starting about a week ago, but it's still north of doubling every 2.5 days. It's the highest extant infection rate in the developed world. It's starting to flatten, but it's starting later than most countries, and still hasn't lowered itself to most countries' pre-flattening rates, even.

Sure, we can question the numbers from some countries, like China, but that really won't make the USA's failure here any more acceptable.

You're looking at total cases instead of cases per capita. I have no idea why you think that's a preferable measure. I don't think any of the nations in question are going to have a single point of origin and the United States is likely to have the most different "patient zeros". The fact that a nation of 330 million people has more total cases than nations with a fifth as many should be wildly unsurprising.

Asian countries have obviously done better. It should be immediately obvious to everyone that the cultural, political, and geographic differences are quite stark.

[Endus]

You're looking at total cases instead of cases per capita. I have no idea why you think that's a preferable measure.

Because outbreaks generally are not evaluated on a per-capita basis. They start from small origin points. A higher population creates a higher potential figure for total infected, but it does not actually affect the development of the infection rate, not unless it's running completely out of control (which brings us back to a failure of policy).

Instead, we look at how many are currently infected, and how many new cases emerge, and assess how well or poorly systems are containing the outbreak.

If you want to argue per-capita figures, then China's response was stellar. Is that reasonable? Per-capita is useful when looking at uncontrolled/uncontrollable vectors, like heart disease or whatnot; you can get an idea of how prevalent they are within a population. Outbreaks like this are geographically connected, not roughly evenly spread throughout a population. And transmission is evaluated in terms of how many new cases an extant case is likely to infect, not in terms of per-capita infection.

I don't think any of the nations in question are going to have a single point of origin and the United States is likely to have the most different "patient zeros". The fact that a nation of 330 million people has more total cases than nations with a fifth as many should be wildly unsurprising.

Infectious outbreaks don't occur spontaneously. You don't automatically have more "patient zeros" because you have a higher population. Transmission isn't more likely just because there's a higher total population.

If we're

That the USA did not lock down travel and require isolation for returning travelers like many other nations just brings us right back to institutional failures leading to higher infection rates in the USA.

Asian countries have obviously done better. It should be immediately obvious to everyone that the cultural, political, and geographic differences are quite stark.

Also flies against your population figures/density arguments, since nations like South Korea and Japan are incredibly densely populated, far more so than the USA.

[Edge-]

You're looking at total cases instead of cases per capita. I have no idea why you think that's a preferable measure. I don't think any of the nations in question are going to have a single point of origin and the United States is likely to have the most different "patient zeros". The fact that a nation of 330 million people has more total cases than nations with a fifth as many should be wildly unsurprising.

Asian countries have obviously done better. It should be immediately obvious to everyone that the cultural, political, and geographic differences are quite stark.

Doing like for like doesn't really change much.

Taking raw testing gives the US a slight edge over South Korea, a country with about 1/6th the population of the US.

Taking per-capita infection rates with some napkin math -

South Korea - 51M population, 1K confirmed cases - 1:54K people infected
USA - 327.2M, 151K confirmed cases - 1:2.1K people infected

So it's not noteworthy at all. Even using like for like the US is doing a fucking shit job and doesn't have much, if anything, to brag about.

Using per-capita numbers to compare the US to South Korea really doesn't do anything to make the US look any better.

[Spectral]

Using per-capita numbers to compare the US to South Korea really doesn't do anything to make the US look any better.

No fucking shit, huh? I've already addressed the fact that Korea performed better than every Western nation.

[Cinnamilk]

You're looking at total cases instead of cases per capita. I have no idea why you think that's a preferable measure. I don't think any of the nations in question are going to have a single point of origin and the United States is likely to have the most different "patient zeros". The fact that a nation of 330 million people has more total cases than nations with a fifth as many should be wildly unsurprising.

Asian countries have obviously done better. It should be immediately obvious to everyone that the cultural, political, and geographic differences are quite stark.

You're aware that this graph has a logarithmic scale, right? Dividing by the population would just be like moving the y, intercept, but it wouldn't do anything to affect the derivative which is the actual rate that it spreads. Something doubling every two days still doubles every two days regardless of whether the population is smaller or larger, as long as there's still sufficient people to infect.

[Spectral]

Because outbreaks generally are not evaluated on a per-capita basis. They start from small origin points.

Snipping the rest of this post because it's obviously wrong from front to back on pretty much every specific point. The American coronavirus outbreak didn't start in a single origin (unless you're tracing it all the way back to Wuhan).

[Machismo]

Snipping the rest of this post because it's obviously wrong from front to back on pretty much every specific point. The American coronavirus outbreak didn't start in a single origin (unless you're tracing it all the way back to Wuhan). The only reason you're choosing to compare the United States to much smaller nations is because you're an unrepentant demagogue.

So, compare it to the largest nation by population, how does the United States stack up?

[Spectral]

You're aware that this graph has a logarithmic scale, right? Dividing by the population would just be like moving the y, intercept, but it wouldn't do anything to affect the derivative which is the actual rate that it spreads. Something doubling every two days still doubles every two days regardless of whether the population is smaller or larger, as long as there's still sufficient people to infect.

The end is the key point - having multiple, high density environments that had multiple individuals enter with infections is going to lead to very rapid spread without fairly draconian measures.

I realize this is the part where we loop back and say, "but Korea". I really don't know what to say to people that think there was a realistic chance of Americans or Spaniards or Brazilians responding like Koreans.

- - - Updated - - -

So, compare it to the largest nation by population, how does the United States stack up?

More or less the way I'd expect it to when the largest nation has the option of imposing measures that civil libertarians would refer to as "the end of the United States" if they happened here. I'll certainly admit that totalitarianism has a few benefits.

Of course, that's assuming that the Chinese numbers are true, which takes it's own sort of faith.

[Cinnamilk]

Snipping the rest of this post because it's obviously wrong from front to back on pretty much every specific point. The American coronavirus outbreak didn't start in a single origin (unless you're tracing it all the way back to Wuhan). The only reason you're choosing to compare the United States to much smaller nations is because you're an unrepentant demagogue.

The original number of people infected with the virus that were introduced to the US is irrelevant in terms of the model. It's a constant.
The important thing is the rate, which is due to how infectious the disease is AND the measures taken to prevent infection. What can be controlled is the governmental response in terms of preparation, identification, and isolation. We had knowledge of this back in January and could've been taking appropriate measures, but we didn't. The result of that is the long stretch of cases doubling every 2 days.

[Machismo]

The end is the key point - having multiple, high density environments that had multiple individuals enter with infections is going to lead to very rapid spread without fairly draconian measures.

I realize this is the part where we loop back and say, "but Korea". I really don't know what to say to people that think there was a realistic chance of Americans or Spaniards or Brazilians responding like Koreans.

- - - Updated - - -


More or less the way I'd expect it to when the largest nation has the option of imposing measures that civil libertarians would refer to as "the end of the United States" if they happened here. I'll certainly admit that totalitarianism has a few benefits.

Of course, that's assuming that the Chinese numbers are true, which takes it's own sort of faith.

So, per-capita also doesn't work in your favor...

The total numbers don't work in your favor...

We are going to see a much faster spread, because of geography, personal habits, and simply public ignorance. The people who swore this was a hoax, and was no big deal, millions of ignorant fools listened to asshats like Trump and Fox News. They swore the scientists were wrong. They have made complete and total fools of themselves.

[Spectral]

So, per-capita also doesn't work in your favor...

The total numbers don't work in your favor...

We are going to see a much faster spread, because of geography, personal habits, and simply public ignorance. The people who swore this was a hoax, and was no big deal, millions of ignorant fools listened to asshats like Trump and Fox News. They swore the scientists were wrong. They have made complete and total fools of themselves.

I'm not sure what you think "my favor". I don't think the United States has done anything that could be called a "good" job, I'm mostly objecting to the framing of it being disastrously worst than other countries when the results are pretty similar across Europe. I realize quite a few people have had a boner for implementing Chinese-style authoritarianism for a long time and see this as another strike in its favor; they may even have a point, but thinking that was a real option here is obviously wrong.

[Machismo]

I'm not sure what you think "my favor". I don't think the United States has done anything that could be called a "good" job, I'm mostly objecting to the framing of it being disastrously worst than other countries when the results are pretty similar across Europe. I realize quite a few people have had a boner for implementing Chinese-style authoritarianism for a long time and see this as another strike in its favor; they may even have a point, but thinking that was a real option here is obviously wrong.

Except, as the data shows... it is worse, and is getting ever more awful by the day.

Americans ignored fucking science, and it's biting us in the ass. Mind you, if people were informed, they could have done this shit on their own. It didn't help that the country's biggest demagogue was preaching outright lies and falsehoods to his cultist followers.