Coronavirus (COVID-19 Outbreak) (97 Viewers)
- Thread starter Bjerknes
- Start date
But for some reason young people vote like they don't matter, and then they don't matter.
And yes, single-payer makes absolute sense. You make several insurance companies duplicate the roles of claims handlers then throw in the litigators between them to assign liability, and no wonder why America has the most expensive health care in the world for a declining average lifespan.
"Could be" = more fake news
This fake crap is rampant now... much as described here:
https://stratechery.com/2020/defining-information/
Great question. Travel always seems to rebound no matter what. Then you always get the next class of young people that has no clue and will step into an active mine field for the 'gram.
We already were seeing the likes of Thailand debating whether they wanted fewer tourists but better ones who spent more. (Kind of a slight to China, really.)
There are going to be the entitled 10% who still want to fly everywhere. They will have to pay for it though. The lower demand and stalled economics will likely mean we will pay more for flights, because of undersupply plus other factors, but we might pay less for hotels and lodging because of oversupply.
I would expect discount travelers to stick to domestic travel for a while -- it's going to be a bit before they want to, or can afford to, go international en masse as they had done prior. I mean, I once paid £29 for a flight from Lisbon to London on RyanAir last year... that is just so economically wrong on so many levels. They're going to be less able to afford to go anywhere and will stick to home while a wealthier class will pay more for the same.
It will be transitional, though, as long as the pressures of growth economics are still in place.
No private insurer wants to be held liable for overall public health because they cannot control it themselves. They will want it to keep their expenses down, but they need someone else to foot most of the bill.
Agreed. The whole lets-get-China thing is stunted in that anger stage, needing someone to blame.
But then I ate a chateaubriand in London in the middle of the mad cow scare in February 2001, so what do I know?
I second that. The rest is about dealing with non-compliance.
The economy was broken and everyone was too afraid to make bold moves. There was something about this that made it all superfragile and it needed a crisis to break out of its death loops and outdated principles.
I think the data coming is data. I have yet to see a reasonable assessment of the risks to warrant one way or the other. Scientific proof is about testing the null hypothesis ... proving that it's not ineffective. I don't see anywhere that burden of proof has been met yet. People want to feel like they can have a little more personal control of their lives, so they want to do something -- buy toilet paper, wear a mask, etc. It's more psychological comfort than physical until proven otherwise.
Yeah, I am no fan of wet markets. But we are collectively responsible for the crap we are in. Finger-pointing just shirks the responsibility and disowns the need to change from a factory farm food supply, inhumane conditions of animals, monoculture crops where all of society is balanced on a knife's edge over a handful of controlled food sources, etc.
And yes, single-payer makes absolute sense. You make several insurance companies duplicate the roles of claims handlers then throw in the litigators between them to assign liability, and no wonder why America has the most expensive health care in the world for a declining average lifespan.
"Could be" = more fake news
This fake crap is rampant now... much as described here:
https://stratechery.com/2020/defining-information/
Great question. Travel always seems to rebound no matter what. Then you always get the next class of young people that has no clue and will step into an active mine field for the 'gram.
We already were seeing the likes of Thailand debating whether they wanted fewer tourists but better ones who spent more. (Kind of a slight to China, really.)
There are going to be the entitled 10% who still want to fly everywhere. They will have to pay for it though. The lower demand and stalled economics will likely mean we will pay more for flights, because of undersupply plus other factors, but we might pay less for hotels and lodging because of oversupply.
I would expect discount travelers to stick to domestic travel for a while -- it's going to be a bit before they want to, or can afford to, go international en masse as they had done prior. I mean, I once paid £29 for a flight from Lisbon to London on RyanAir last year... that is just so economically wrong on so many levels. They're going to be less able to afford to go anywhere and will stick to home while a wealthier class will pay more for the same.
It will be transitional, though, as long as the pressures of growth economics are still in place.
No private insurer wants to be held liable for overall public health because they cannot control it themselves. They will want it to keep their expenses down, but they need someone else to foot most of the bill.
Agreed. The whole lets-get-China thing is stunted in that anger stage, needing someone to blame.
But then I ate a chateaubriand in London in the middle of the mad cow scare in February 2001, so what do I know?
I second that. The rest is about dealing with non-compliance.
The economy was broken and everyone was too afraid to make bold moves. There was something about this that made it all superfragile and it needed a crisis to break out of its death loops and outdated principles.
I think the data coming is data. I have yet to see a reasonable assessment of the risks to warrant one way or the other. Scientific proof is about testing the null hypothesis ... proving that it's not ineffective. I don't see anywhere that burden of proof has been met yet. People want to feel like they can have a little more personal control of their lives, so they want to do something -- buy toilet paper, wear a mask, etc. It's more psychological comfort than physical until proven otherwise.
Yeah, I am no fan of wet markets. But we are collectively responsible for the crap we are in. Finger-pointing just shirks the responsibility and disowns the need to change from a factory farm food supply, inhumane conditions of animals, monoculture crops where all of society is balanced on a knife's edge over a handful of controlled food sources, etc.
That's what I'm afraid of, and hence why I really don't want to see a bailout of the airlines. They've been effectively ran into the ground; some of it due to regulations, but most of it from their own incompetence. I was supposed to go to Greece in September with a stopover somewhere in central Europe, and the costs of flights are essentially the same as they were two months ago -- despite a lack of demand and oil prices at 20 year lows. Undersupply will be a problem, but a lot of people aren't going to be flying across the atlantic when 40% of the workforce was laid off for months. If we're truly in a depression, there won't be any demand at all.
I think you're right about folks staying closer to home. If oil remains lower due to oversupply and demand, gas should be cheaper, so people will drive. Another thought I was having is that folks will become more risk averse, not just financially or economically, but also in terms of travelling to certain areas for health concerns. The only piece of good news that could stem from this outbreak is the realization that your health actually matters, so the daily trips to grab that 1050 calorie iced latte might not be such a good idea. And that may even trend towards the idea of visiting places such as China, or others with environmental factors most wouldn't have considered before.
All of the problems from 2008/2009 never really went away. There's just more debt now.
I think you're right about folks staying closer to home. If oil remains lower due to oversupply and demand, gas should be cheaper, so people will drive. Another thought I was having is that folks will become more risk averse, not just financially or economically, but also in terms of travelling to certain areas for health concerns. The only piece of good news that could stem from this outbreak is the realization that your health actually matters, so the daily trips to grab that 1050 calorie iced latte might not be such a good idea. And that may even trend towards the idea of visiting places such as China, or others with environmental factors most wouldn't have considered before.
All of the problems from 2008/2009 never really went away. There's just more debt now.
I really hope you right, don't get me wrong. It's like the old fashion personal fight some of us have between religion and science, what you want to believe against what you have to accept
Debt is a bomb that sooner than later is gonna create a huge implosion in US.
- - - Updated - - -
Yep, specially huawei 5G... nonsense, noone could possibly know that, of course chaos theory shows balance and connections in a really crazy level so you may even create a case about anything, not valid but still a case
Debt is a bomb that sooner than later is gonna create a huge implosion in US.
- - - Updated - - -
Yep, specially huawei 5G... nonsense, noone could possibly know that, of course chaos theory shows balance and connections in a really crazy level so you may even create a case about anything, not valid but still a case
