Originally Posted by
WillBrink
Sweden is apparently taking a different approach. It may rapidly increase the mass immunity effect and pass through Sweden faster resulting in approx same number of deaths (or less?) without collapsing their economy too. This will all be very interesting to see in hindsight once over as to what approaches and actions taken had the most beneficial net effects and things could change rapidly, but interesting. I don't think the US has the stomach for such an approach regardless and must appear as if everything and anything was done to save "just one life" even if it results in net more deaths due to say drug use, suicides, domestic violence, alcohol abuse, etc and collapse of the economy which will increase homelessness, etc. Their approach could also blow up in their face and get real ugly:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/worl...irus-pandemic/
I have been following them.
And heavily believe less onerous and crippling actions could have have been taken here. Maybe a little less blasé than them, but not as aggressive as we did here.
Basically, we went well past the point of diminishing returns.
I stand by by previous numbers after review.
I have also bar napkined an unbelievably contagious and severely virulent mutation model sweeping through everyone in a twelve month period here. after talking with a few other experts. From a sorrow and grief perspective it is humbling. From a practical survival of the human race and function of society and economics brutally objective standpoint - life would go on and overall possibly improve.
I’ll give some numbers and let experts in various job markets, sustainment services, etc. weigh in.
!!! These numbers are not for COVID — they are based on a far more contagious and far more virulent model — !!!
There are over 330 million people in America. There are about 36 million hospital admissions each year. Some are individuals with several admissions each year.
A strain that took out about 90% of people 85 and over would kill about six million people. Leaving a very small population of the spriest, sharpest, and most healthy of our most elderly.
Taking out about 75% of those 75-84 would be around another 12 million deaths.
Those 65-74 losing about a third would be around seven million.
The above would be stricken brutally because of the increased diseases, conditions, and frailty of aging. They are going to be hit hard. The most lucky, healthy, etc. for those ages would become a very small part of the population.
Forty to 64 is a very odd bracket. Genetics, lifestyle choices, decision making skills, and luck create some extremes of health in this bracket. Bad MS, myasthenia gravis, heart disease, pulmonary issues, morbid obesity, uncontrolled diabetes, strokes, renal disease, lupus, sickle cell, alcohol abuse, drugs, cancer, etc. have all reared their heads and I’m still coming up with 20% for this group. Mainly among the unhealthiest for their age. There is not a whole lot of difference between a healthy 98 year old and unhealthy 98 year old in terms of remaining life. There is a massive difference between a healthy 50 year old and an unhealthy one. This is also a very large group. About 20 million deaths.
The power of young physiology is still with the 20-39 year olds overall. Around a 5% / four million loss. Those whose choices and decisions have led to extremely poor health for their ages will bear the brunt of it.
Babies to 19 would be about a percent. Around one million deaths. Crushing mostly those with significant diseases, congenital issues, and other medical issues.
About 50 million deaths spread out over a year.
Well beyond the 3 million deaths or so we have each year.
Above the 36 million admissions a year as well.
A massive emotional event and tragedy.
But- this is the harsh but- this would be distributed heavily, so heavily among the 3 million that were going to die this year, next year, or the year after ....
People that would have spent another year, two years, decade in and out of the hospital, ER, ICU, would be gone.
People on SSDI, Medicaid, Medicare, SS, etc. off the rolls. Approximately 75-80% of the events occurring in the non working/tax producing work force.
There would be niche sectors of the economy out of business, others would boom. There would be little loss to the tax paying base and workforce. Some nice areas of expertise would be lost. New niches making up for this would develop. About 1.5 trillion of the annual budget would be freed up. This is a very strange push/pull on the economy effect I cannot fully predict or model on various individual aspects. Some areas of healthcare would lose jobs. We could learn our lesson and bring manufacturing back for new jobs. Non service industry jobs. With benefits.
I think the overall effect would be much like WWII and post WWII America. The factor I can’t model is and nail down the end result is how long would it take for us to go from that to back at 50% of the population on benefits, people arguing over pretend genders and bathrooms, making up insignificant jobs and education majors, companies focusing on the short term and shitcanning us back to 2020 part two.
(The impact on the rest of the world and the conditions in much of it would be even more brutal- cheap, slave like overseas labor would dry up. If you think a ten to fifteen percent hit on the American population is brutal, imagine what it would do in most of the rest of the world)
And again, this is from a survival of the human race and function of the country/world perspective, not individual loss and grief.
“Where weapons may not be carried, it is well to carry weapons.”
Site Sponsor
Site Sponsor
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks