RichardGibbons Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 Given that Trump's business interests have been directly excluded from the bailout/stimulus, does that make him more or less likely to undermine social distancing? More likely. The optimal outcome for the economy is to get everyone sick over the next 2-3 months, let all the old people die (they don't contribute much to the economy anyway), and then have life revert to normal when everyone has herd immunity.
Liberty Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 Given that Trump's business interests have been directly excluded from the bailout/stimulus, does that make him more or less likely to undermine social distancing? There's a global pandemic going on, people are dying, suffering, but it's still all about him: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1242905328209080331?s=20 Decisions never explained from data or logic, just whatever his wishful thinking of the moment is and what’s best for him. And in what should be a unifying moment where we all pull together, he’s somehow managed to make it super political and divisive. He's more likely to end it now, since his hotels need customers even more. Unintended consequences.
Liberty Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 Given that Trump's business interests have been directly excluded from the bailout/stimulus, does that make him more or less likely to undermine social distancing? More likely. The optimal outcome for the economy is to get everyone sick over the next 2-3 months, let all the old people die (they don't contribute much to the economy anyway), and then have life revert to normal when everyone has herd immunity. Life revert to normal after that? lol
RichardGibbons Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 Life revert to normal after that? lol Well, not totally--some businesses won't survive. But if we literally get everyone infected in 2 months and all those infections resolved in 3 months, then there really isn't anything to worry about (economically speaking) after that. I think the faster this happens, the smaller the economic second-order effects, and the more businesses will survive. Even if bad stuff remains economically, it's much easier to, say, do bridge financing after it's clear the pandemic has run its course and customers have returned to the business. I'm putting aside the millions of deaths as not mattering that much to the economy, and not having that many second-order effects. (Also, I'm not suggesting this is what should happen. I'm saying, "if I were a psycho trying to do nothing but maximize economic outcomes and taking nothing else into account, that's what I'd do.")
ERICOPOLY Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 The question isn't what Richard would do if he were a psycho, it's what Trump would do if he were a psycho.
Spekulatius Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 Ackman; https://pershingsquareholdings.com/pershing-square-capital-management-l-p-releases-letter-to-investors/ So...it looks like this guy held CDS and went on CNBC last week and had a meltdown about the crisis. Then unloaded the CDS Monday and went long stocks and back on CNBC (edit: Bloomberg on Tuesday) touting that everything is going to be ok. How is this remotely allowed/ethical? He brought talking his book to a new level. Lol...makes you respect people like WEB and Munger that much more because they don't engage in such despicable antics and still outperform these scumbags. He was totally transparent about his position at all times. You are allowed to have an opinion - and I have agreed with his opinion all along. Doesn't matter if his opinion was right or wrong. He has a long track record of taking positions and then going on media outlets pounding out his thesis. One big example is Herbalife short position. So, taking a short and then going on CNBC and trashing it repeatedly. May not be illegal, but certainly not noble behavior. There are many investors out there who do not resort to such tactics that outperform this guy significantly. Could not agree more. This guy is a complete turd ball...comes on TV ..starts crying about his Dad and shows concern and all that...I can't believe how pathetic he is. Where was the crying when he was trying to fkover a lot of diseased patients when he was all in on Valeant...he is just a pathetic human being. I agree, he has shown questionable character all along- just look up Gotham Partner blowup. Then his fake moral display is just to much. He is just a guy talking his book.
Jurgis Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 I have a great business idea. http://www.waldeneffect.org/20120612solarcoolinghat.jpg Just point fans away from the hat and fans would blow away any viruses coming towards a person. This is insta profit. You can thank me later.
thepupil Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 Ackman; https://pershingsquareholdings.com/pershing-square-capital-management-l-p-releases-letter-to-investors/ So...it looks like this guy held CDS and went on CNBC last week and had a meltdown about the crisis. Then unloaded the CDS Monday and went long stocks and back on CNBC (edit: Bloomberg on Tuesday) touting that everything is going to be ok. How is this remotely allowed/ethical? He brought talking his book to a new level. Lol...makes you respect people like WEB and Munger that much more because they don't engage in such despicable antics and still outperform these scumbags. He was totally transparent about his position at all times. You are allowed to have an opinion - and I have agreed with his opinion all along. Doesn't matter if his opinion was right or wrong. He has a long track record of taking positions and then going on media outlets pounding out his thesis. One big example is Herbalife short position. So, taking a short and then going on CNBC and trashing it repeatedly. May not be illegal, but certainly not noble behavior. There are many investors out there who do not resort to such tactics that outperform this guy significantly. Could not agree more. This guy is a complete turd ball...comes on TV ..starts crying about his Dad and shows concern and all that...I can't believe how pathetic he is. Where was the crying when he was trying to fkover a lot of diseased patients when he was all in on Valeant...he is just a pathetic human being. I agree, he has shown questionable character all along- just look up Gotham Partner blowup. Then his fake moral display is just to much. He is just a guy talking his book. Ackman was early to identify a scenario not priced in the credit markets, bought a convex hedge, and protected his LP’s capital. As a very small LP PSHNA via I appreciate that very much. I think he truly believes in pretty mich everything he does whether it be Herbalife Valeant or his successes. The guy is dedicated, passionate, and his brain is worth more than a 40% discount to NAV. He was literally short indices, not talking down a company. He didn’t force levered holders of structured credit and mortgages to blow up. He didn’t force anyone to sell their stocks. #teamackman
Spekulatius Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 Given that Trump's business interests have been directly excluded from the bailout/stimulus, does that make him more or less likely to undermine social distancing? More likely. The optimal outcome for the economy is to get everyone sick over the next 2-3 months, let all the old people die (they don't contribute much to the economy anyway), and then have life revert to normal when everyone has herd immunity. Life revert to normal after that? lol Other than the US becoming a 2nd world country basically. The second order effects of this would be quite unwelcome, I think. That said we need to think when and how the US is going back to work and tentative timelines for this. It’s got a be a step by step process, because if everyone rushes into a church on Easter to sing kumbajah in each other faces it pretty much guarantees another epidemic. I think what needs to be created is massive amount of rapid testing capacity they can be available in short order. he should get a task force to get this I talked in short order, with folks working 24/7 on this. maybe use his 1950 war req. law to get companies to do this or offer billions in contract. Whatever it takes. The quicker we have this system in place and the more we know exactly what we are dealing with epidemically, the faster we can turn on the economy and get people to work with minimal risk and fight flare ups.
Liberty Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/25/coronavirus-update-new-york-hospitals-battle-outbreak.html
Liberty Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 The question isn't what Richard would do if he were a psycho, it's what Trump would do if he were a psycho. Total US casualties in WWII were 1,076,245 according to Wikipedia. Guy thinks this is just some band aid that needs to be ripped off and the economy would be fine.. Second order effects would destroy it. Healthcare system would be destroyed, mortality for the young would be way high because they couldn't get care, etc. And even if you don't die, if you end up in the hospital and ICU and have permanent damage, that's economic too.
Dalal.Holdings Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 A refrigerated truck has been stationed outside to hold the bodies of the dead. Over the past 24 hours, New York City’s public hospital system said in a statement, 13 people at Elmhurst had died All of the more than 1,800 intensive care units in the city are expected to be full by Friday, according to a Federal Emergency Management Agency briefing obtained by The New York Times. Patients could stay for weeks, limiting space for newly sickened people. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/25/nyregion/nyc-coronavirus-hospitals.html FYI. Destroys the thesis that this has infected millions months ago in the U.S.
Liberty Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 Life revert to normal after that? lol Well, not totally--some businesses won't survive. But if we literally get everyone infected in 2 months and all those infections resolved in 3 months, then there really isn't anything to worry about (economically speaking) after that. I think the faster this happens, the smaller the economic second-order effects, and the more businesses will survive. Even if bad stuff remains economically, it's much easier to, say, do bridge financing after it's clear the pandemic has run its course and customers have returned to the business. I'm putting aside the millions of deaths as not mattering that much to the economy, and not having that many second-order effects. (Also, I'm not suggesting this is what should happen. I'm saying, "if I were a psycho trying to do nothing but maximize economic outcomes and taking nothing else into account, that's what I'd do.") If you're looking for the least economically damaging, it's the non-stupid one, which is what south-korea and singapore and taiwan has done: https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56
elliott Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 Given that Trump's business interests have been directly excluded from the bailout/stimulus, does that make him more or less likely to undermine social distancing? More likely. The optimal outcome for the economy is to get everyone sick over the next 2-3 months, let all the old people die (they don't contribute much to the economy anyway), and then have life revert to normal when everyone has herd immunity. Richard, what do you make of the points Taleb (and others) make against the case for herd immunity? some body posted an article Taleb co-authored for the guardian a couple of pages back. anyway, one of the several points is, herd immunity relies on, well, immunity, but at this point that has not been proven, ie, you get sick once, you may still get sick again (and transmit the virus).
minten Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 anyway, one of the several points is, herd immunity relies on, well, immunity, but at this point that has not been proven, ie, you get sick once, you may still get sick again (and transmit the virus). Not proven, but pretty likely based on experiences with similar viruses. Btw, they injected COVID-19 on a couple of macaque monkeys, then had them recover and then injected them again. They did develop immunity. That being said, you would think you'd have a large enough number of human subjects you could try it on at this stage.
orthopa Posted March 25, 2020 Posted March 25, 2020 https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-the-coronavirus-as-deadly-as-they-say-11585088464?mod=hp_opin_pos_2 "In Iceland, deCode Genetics is working with the government to perform widespread testing. In a sample of nearly 2,000 entirely asymptomatic people, researchers estimated disease prevalence of just over 1%. Iceland’s first case was reported on Feb. 28, weeks behind the U.S. It’s plausible that the proportion of the U.S. population that has been infected is double, triple or even 10 times as high as the estimates from Iceland. That also implies a dramatically lower fatality rate." "The epidemic started in China sometime in November or December. The first confirmed U.S. cases included a person who traveled from Wuhan on Jan. 15, and it is likely that the virus entered before that: Tens of thousands of people traveled from Wuhan to the U.S. in December. Existing evidence suggests that the virus is highly transmissible and that the number of infections doubles roughly every three days. An epidemic seed on Jan. 1 implies that by March 9 about six million people in the U.S. would have been infected. As of March 23, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 499 Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. If our surmise of six million cases is accurate, that’s a mortality rate of 0.01%, assuming a two week lag between infection and death. This is one-tenth of the flu mortality rate of 0.1%. Such a low death rate would be cause for optimism." "This does not make Covid-19 a nonissue. The daily reports from Italy and across the U.S. show real struggles and overwhelmed health systems. But a 20,000- or 40,000-death epidemic is a far less severe problem than one that kills two million. Given the enormous consequences of decisions around Covid-19 response, getting clear data to guide decisions now is critical. We don’t know the true infection rate in the U.S. Antibody testing of representative samples to measure disease prevalence (including the recovered) is crucial. Nearly every day a new lab gets approval for antibody testing, so population testing using this technology is now feasible." "If we’re right about the limited scale of the epidemic, then measures focused on older populations and hospitals are sensible. Elective procedures will need to be rescheduled. Hospital resources will need to be reallocated to care for critically ill patients. Triage will need to improve. And policy makers will need to focus on reducing risks for older adults and people with underlying medical conditions. A universal quarantine may not be worth the costs it imposes on the economy, community and individual mental and physical health. We should undertake immediate steps to evaluate the empirical basis of the current lockdowns." Granted this is an opinion piece but this has been my position all along. Will be interesting to see what the end result of this. Glad to see this was published in WSJ.
orthopa Posted March 26, 2020 Posted March 26, 2020 I guess I will know for sure if I was wrong if/when the healthcare system collapses. I could get lucky as my predictions above (not too bad for 2 weeks ago huh?) were before the nationwide stay home theme and ramp up in healthcare preparedness across the country. I believe a lot of our back and forth at the time was about Washington state? and the deaths there? They are at 110 so I guess it remains to be seen if that continues to exponentially increase with time. NYC will be the test as that is where the healthcare system could break and wasnt even close at the time of our discussions. FWIW I still think there is no doubt millions had been infected then, and even more so now. Dont forget the asymptomatic rate is 86% per Chinese data. For now its a point that is a waste of time to argue as until further means for testing comes out we will never know. What will really tell us for sure will be serologic testing which I hope for the economy's sake happens very soon as that would be a means for every group to tell if they have been infected and are immune. That could be a very quick send away lab and could be done on all asymptomatic people and in any doctors office, ER, etc. FWIW the healthcare system is holding up good(NYC to be determined still), and has been since we talked. Its been ~2 weeks since we went back and forth and we are up to 698 deaths. Since that time ~26k give or take have died from heart disease so heart disease may still be the winner this year. Will have to see. And yes they are real living people so them dying counts too, even though it doesn't "spread". And yes those people that live have life long lung and heart issues, CHF, etc. I didn't know we had such empathetic people on the board! I do find it very interesting how much everyone who is not medical trained does seem to care about people dying, ICU beds, ethical hard decisions, medicine etc as this what those in the medical field deal with every day. My hope is once this is over there is just as much passionate discussion about diabetes, HTN, heart disease etc. With the amount of outpouring and compassion I can certainly envision many on the board spending time at nursing homes, cardiac rehab facilities, and community health centers going forward. That will be great as opposed to a passing interest due to self preservation. Thanks for your honest response--I really do appreciate it when people are willing to act with intellectual honesty. So much of that is missing in the world today. That said, your 86% asymptomatic rate isn't credible. The most credible number I've read is ~30% (though at this point, I'd be delighted if it were 86%. Asymptomatic people are bad early in a pandemic, and good when it's out of control.) In any case, we'll have to keep watching New York to see when they get overloaded. New York's normal capacity is about 60K hospital beds and 3000 ICU beds. So, I'll assume that if we go over, say, 70k simultaneous hospitalized COVID-19 patients or 3300 simultaneous COVID-19 ICU patients, that means that you'll have recognized that "this isn't a big deal, there are already hundreds of thousands if not millions infected and there's been no problems" analysis was incorrect. It's nice to have goal posts planted firmly in the ground, and clearly if COVID-19 patients alone--without even taking into account people in the hospital for other reasons--exceed hospital capacity, then it was a pretty big deal. All that said, I'm pretty surprised that you don't understand why people would care much more about an epidemic than heart disease deaths. I guess I understand why a mostly investor/business crowd (this board) cares more about a pandemic as its an immediate known threat to ones life and when driven by fear even more so. I guess my point again tho is that people die every day in medicine. We run codes when the pt arrives with no pulse, sometimes they die. We see strokes paralyze people. We see people on dialysis who are dying right in front of your eyes. We see non compliant cardiac/DM patients who are taking years off their lives and dont care even though they know it. This happens every day, all day, all across the world. This will likely be a flash in the pan looking at the big picture many years from now. The other diseases I have mentioned wont. And almost everyone on this board/parents loved ones will die of CA/MI/DM etc and surely right now care much more about Covid19. Does that many any sense? Dont be worried about what is going to kill you and how to change that but what your AFRAID might kill you? My point regarding time spent with those dying wasn't necessarily a jab but is true. If we really cared that much about people dying we would be spending time in nursing homes, rehab facilities, dialysis centers etc. That obviously wont happen. Many non medical people have become very interested in deaths and treatment of the ill. Thats great but IMO is mostly due to a the natural flight or flight response we all have to an immediate know threat right in front of our face 24hrs a day. I have read on twitter many people abhorred by the fact that the economy may open and people may die. That being said I cant believe how many people on waiting lists for lung/heart/kidney etc transplants die never getting an organ. You just don't hear about it everyday and we each have the power to control that directly, but few will. You can go down this rabbit hole quick but I think I made my point.
minten Posted March 26, 2020 Posted March 26, 2020 I guess I understand why a mostly investor/business crowd (this board) cares more about a pandemic as its an immediate known threat to ones life and when driven by fear even more so. I guess my point again tho is that people die every day in medicine. We run codes when the pt arrives with no pulse, sometimes they die. We see strokes paralyze people. We see people on dialysis who are dying right in front of your eyes. We see non compliant cardiac/DM patients who are taking years off their lives and dont care even though they know it. This happens every day, all day, all across the world. This will likely be a flash in the pan looking at the big picture many years from now. The other diseases I have mentioned wont. And almost everyone on this board/parents loved ones will die of CA/MI/DM etc and surely right now care much more about Covid19. Does that many any sense? Dont be worried about what is going to kill you and how to change that but what your AFRAID might kill you? My point regarding time spent with those dying wasn't necessarily a jab but is true. If we really cared that much about people dying we would be spending time in nursing homes, rehab facilities, dialysis centers etc. That obviously wont happen. Many non medical people have become very interested in deaths and treatment of the ill. Thats great but IMO is mostly due to a the natural flight or flight response we all have to an immediate know threat right in front of our face 24hrs a day. I have read on twitter many people abhorred by the fact that the economy may open and people may die. That being said I cant believe how many people on waiting lists for lung/heart/kidney etc transplants die never getting an organ. You just don't hear about it everyday and we each have the power to control that directly, but few will. You can go down this rabbit hole quick but I think I made my point. Your post makes a lot of sense. I'm surprised about the large number of ER-doctors etc that go on cam these last few weeks, visibly very emotional, about the COVID-situation and patients that they've lost. Really makes me wonder why this gets to them (which it obviously does), while their day-to-day job normally can't be that much different.
Liberty Posted March 26, 2020 Posted March 26, 2020 https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/25/coronavirus-white-house-health-advisor-fauci-says-us-needs-to-be-prepared-for-second-cycle.html
KCLarkin Posted March 26, 2020 Posted March 26, 2020 Granted this is an opinion piece but this has been my position all along. Will be interesting to see what the end result of this. Glad to see this was published in WSJ. Yes, your opinion is that, let's say, 6 million were infected as of March 9th. If the infection rate doubles every 3 days, there should be 200 million infected. And by Friday, every single person in the US will be infected. The problem is that no evidence supports this opinion.
LC Posted March 26, 2020 Posted March 26, 2020 Given the lack of reliable data, we really have just guesses as to when the virus first entered the US, how many were (and are) infected, how many died from the virus and were not tested, etc. etc. etc. The point is, the only real way to determine (generally) the severity will be this year's morality and hospital utilization compared to the prior few years.
Santayana Posted March 26, 2020 Posted March 26, 2020 I think the reason you can't completely discount the idea that it's been here for a while is that the R0 will be constantly changing as more people have immunity. The idea of doubling makes sense when most people are susceptible, but once you get to the point where a large portion of the population has already been infected, the spread will start to look very different. What we really need is antibody testing.
Castanza Posted March 26, 2020 Posted March 26, 2020 All I have to say about this Bill nonsense is that I agree with Justin Amash. Bills should be simple and on single issues. Every bill that hits the floor has hidden agendas and a bunch of unrelated nonsense attached to further degrade the freedoms of Americans while also further intrenching government. I mean how many times in the last two decades have we seen thousand page documents submitted and voted in all within 24hours. This is something everyone should be outraged about. From Obamacare to Omnibus the whole thing has been a joke. ————————— Investment wise, I think a bill (regardless of what it is) will bring some much needed stability to the market. Then again, I kind of like the volatility. I fully agree with you on the simplicity of bills. Sadly we don't live in that environment. But c'mon, this is a 2 trillion dollar there's room in there for everyone's hobbies - Republican and Democrat. Usually those are pretty cheap too. But they wanted a 500 billion fund with no oversight to be used at the discretion of the Treasury - read "Trump". Now seriously, I don't care who you are lefty, righty, republican, democrat, agnostic, stoner, libertarian, extraterrestrial you can't tell me with a straight face that you trust Trump with 500 billion, no strings attached. Start at 2:30 and see just a glimpse of all the add-ons. And no, I don’t trust Trump with 500B and I also don’t like the anonymity that was proposed for companies.
Liberty Posted March 26, 2020 Posted March 26, 2020 https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/26/coronavirus-live-updates-china-cases-spains-death-count-surpasses-china.html
Dalal.Holdings Posted March 26, 2020 Posted March 26, 2020 Granted this is an opinion piece but this has been my position all along. Will be interesting to see what the end result of this. Glad to see this was published in WSJ. Yes, your opinion is that, let's say, 6 million were infected as of March 9th. If the infection rate doubles every 3 days, there should be 200 million infected. And by Friday, every single person in the US will be infected. The problem is that no evidence supports this opinion. If millions were infected months ago, then why are NYC ICUs filling up now? Is it the last few million cases that are leading to sudden surge of severe cases? Why were ICUs not stacked in January? In February? FYI many of these patients are requiring 1 week+ on ventilators. What would we have seen in January and February for the "millions infected for months" scenario to be valid? What NYC hospitals are revealing to me now vs back then tells me in very clear terms that this thesis is invalid. Or, as Charlie would say: invert, always invert.
Recommended Posts