Damn. Please ignore the first two paragraphs in the above post. Control A is a dangerous tool sometimes.

Mr 0,

For someone with engineering training you are remarkably dense. This could never be an extinction level event. While there are a large number of fatalities these are mostly affecting the elderly. For the evolutionally active population below 50yrs the fatality rate is <1%.

There is no upside to this plague. It is something you survive. That the world learnt from the Spanish flu shows that we don't always repeat our mistakes.

Isn't it surprising, well perhaps not, that the very people who are crying "racist" when Coronavirus is referred to the Chinese virus, are still referring to previous such virus attacks as the "Spanish" & the "European" flue.

That they only believe something is racist when it refers to a not white group is just so obvious, & so disgusting, that they should be excluded from discussions.

SR,
"I gather you are looking at the link I posted for the modelling figures given this is the figure it is showing now."

No I was referring to the link you had on European flu cases.

"The figure was closer to 200,000 when I first looked at the site. However as more and more states enacted more and more robust responses the modelling reflected those changes as it was expected to do."

That's just not true. Deborah Birx has specifically said that the 100000 - 200000 figures were from models which took the mitigation measures (social distancing etc) into account. The originally 2 million deaths figures that has Paul wetting his pants were what the models said would happen without societal action.

The 200,000 figure has been declining because new and better data has been flowing. And that data is almost always less alarmist. The original figures assumed a high contagion rate which is now known to be wrong. The original figures assumed that close to 100% of the population were susceptible. That is now known to be wrong.

As each of those wrong assumption are replaced with more accurate assumptions in the models inputs, smaller case and death rates come out.

And as the dangers from the Wuhan flu tend to the less extreme so should the extreme counter-measures be reassessed. Since we and the US are now in for a penny, we may as well stay in for a pound. But Morrisson et al are talking about this economic mothballing continuing into 2021. That, based on current information is just wrong and must be reassessed.

This economy should be allowed to flower again by the end of the month.

Economist Peter Smith asks:

"If essential services and so-called essential services can keep safe while keeping on running, why can’t every business. Sure, they would need to put in extra measures, cleaning, have hand sanitizers, wear masks and gloves maybe, distance a little more maybe, take temperatures of employees on arrival, make sure those who are sick don’t come in. It can be done."

Smith believes the shut downs are untenable and can't go on. Governments need to balance benefits against costs.

" It’s hard these days with such a moronic media and large swathes of POPULATIONS LACKING THE STOICISM AND COMMON SENSE OF PREVIOUS GENERATIONS. But that’s when leaders of stature are needed".

I'm not sure that we have any "leaders" with enough "stature" to see us through this.

Governments need to balance benefits against costs.
ttbn,
You forgot the juggling of the throwing spanners into the works Left !