ADVERTISEMENT

Comparing flu deaths to COVID-19 deaths is like comparing apples to oranges

It appears the takeaway from your perspective is testing is the key first step in dealing with Covid-19. Yet we know that somehow a jump of this naturally occurring virus happened in late 2019 in Wuhan China. The first case of what proved to be a highly contagious and stealthy (asymptomatic individuals means significant undercounting of actual cases) virus came as a surprise to everyone. It would seem in this situation the virus would have been able to establish widespread distribution before testing was even contemplated. Yet China was able to hold their deaths to 3/1M, & effectively contain the virus. Unfortunately China is not providing test numbers which would underscore the critical nature of testing.

Insight from someone closer to China than the rest of us who view this board regarding how this miraculous containment was achieved would be helpful.

I have always said the longer the delay the more draconian the measures thus their airtight lockdown. Plus the passing of a tightly controlled law that everyone has to wear a mask when outside helped.
But the rest of the measures I suspect is textbook pandemic management. Containment at all cost before even considering mitigation. Containment included testing, tracking, mapping and then isolating the primary and secondary contacts.

I can really only speak of the situation I find myself here in Singapore. There has been a massive rise in cases in the past month from like 300 cases which we held down for a good 2months. Then the 2nd wave of spread -- the imports where visitors and returning singaporeans would bring back the virus as the world had caught on to the disease by then. Thats was in early March.

The big numbers came really from the spread of the virus in the migrant workers' dormitories of where there are quite a few. All living in close quarters, on a small campus. This in itself is symbolic fo the little island that is Singapore -- everyone living in tight quarters (-- and like NYC). Most of these workers are from South Asia, mainly Indians and Bangladeshis.

After a huge spike that went on for a good two weeks of over 1000 cases each day, the numbers have somewhat subsided. Its about 18,000 cases.

I have been told by frontline healthcare worker/friend of mine that they have already tested 60% of these migrant workers in the last two weeks, even though it has gone unreported or through official channels.
And if you do extensive testing, then the numbers will surely rocket up and they have.
To date, 80-90% of all cases here has been within the confines of the dorm campuses and have so far shown that the numbers are falling.

The test, trace and isolate the workers, just like they did with the 1st wave and the 2nd. The non-infected workers have all been told to socially distant themselves and wear masks when they are in a crowd.

The formula is still the same. Containment. The logic being is you let the numbers get out of hand, you will need more draconian measures. Its very hard work. There are armies of tracers and people (initially from the hospitals but eventually the roped in the detectives and trained others) to trace and manage the people in isolation. Its a lot cheaper than mitigation.

We had our semi-lockdown initiated like three weeks ago. I can go out, exercise but gyms were closed. I have to wear a mask outside as a law or people selling your food are not allowed to serve to you.
When in a queue for food, there are stripes pasted on the floor to indicate the safe distance from the other person. (They almost stuck the stripes on the floors everywhere overnight, before the 'lockdown' was initiated.)

So far, nearly 17,500 cases and 17 deaths. The death count here matters.

The semi-lockdown will be eased a bit starting the 5th of May and incrementally. I can go get a haircut now.

The key that isn't mentioned a lot is that their communication here has been very clear. I was aware of this possibility epidemic back in 1st week of January. The water was never poisoned from the start. There is institutional memory and knowing that we have had MERs, SARs etc in the last 15-17 yrs.

The communication was clear and concise from the 1st week of January and everything was incremental, people understood the seriousness of the situation. Other lessons learnt from SARs -- Stockpile PPEs and ventilators, etc. Its was also about reminding people of their values and why you are making these sacrifices. We are all in it together as the primary message.

People wear masks because it was about not infecting another person. It's an ageing society here where 23+% of the population is over 60y.o -- so people have been drummed into their consciousness that the elderly are the most vulnerable and therefore, go volunteer or at least trying an not get them infected. Mortgage,car payments have been allowed to be delayed and I think I can claim $1k per month from the govt until further notice. I need to look at the T&Cs, which I have not.

Its tough emotionally though. I know friends in the frontline who have not hugged their mums for a good 3-4 months now. (They see them on video calls mainly) Remember we have been on this war-footing since mid to late January, certainly at a high level since early Feb.

The lessons learnt is that you need to bring people together and get them to want to do things for each other. But unfortunate the level of social distrust has been stoked to such a level, it would have been impossible to have the same thing in the States under the current environment.


Fyi. In case you guys are wondering whats happened to the thousands of infected migrant workers:

Singapore's recovered foreign workers to be housed on SuperStar cruise ships

0pLjvCik4CwLv_dXZa0nAz45ZMYqZF1gwabbLF_YWvZw3tva0XJGCvK2udSZ_nmXHnZBfT65YEXrJNFs51FJnkKebMEitEnK_zmfrde2OeqNhsoOZjtWM6sHqSPeopa6DxJ7bfE-nWcYQkPS5zLJGdc



814-large-758e379781f6dcec02844809e5805e7f.jpg



2d0eb4d7-e7ab-4a3e-8f12-419f941f4ec6_inside_cabins-1.jpg



The cruise ships arent doing anything anyway -- so the govt here has chartered them and they are now on a cruise to nowhere.

My tax money. :eek:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark
Draconian is a relative term. Very often Google is your friend. Although I tried several times to find where President Daniels said opening Purdue to on campus this fall was unlikely, or where he said there was zero risk to people under 20 I was unsuccessful. However, numerous accounts of China’s early response to the virus are readily available. I picked one from the New York Times that speaks pretty clearly to China’s testing, tracking, and containment.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/06/world/asia/coronavirus-china-wuhan-quarantine.html

In short, “testing” became taking temperature door to door and at best “containing” became sending the sick to “quarantine centers”.

I recall when President Trump announced stopping all flights from China, he was widely criticized. To a degree what China does or did with this virus among her own citizens is not of paramount importance to me. It is however as obvious that actions that are “accepted” for the greater good of China, are thankfully unconscionable in the US where individual rights and freedoms are deeply woven into our social fabric.

How this country deals with the reality of what China is, lets say culturally, and her economic power and clear desires in the post Covid-19 world is of far more importance to not only this country but the rest of the world than the short term physical toll this disease has on America.

FWIW it is good that you are comforted by what Singapore has and is doing in response to Covid-19, it is however irrelevant to what is and can be done in the US.


edit to add link and 1 line summary of lengthy article.
 
Last edited:
You may want to put some thought into what being an independent moderate actually means.

The problem with being a moderate hit home to me with Trump's election. I spent a lot of time railing against both sides. The problem though is best summed up by a quote from Stewart in Big Bang. It is wrong to call a tomato a vegetable. It is very wrong to call it a suspension bridge.

The side that voted against Trump was the vegetable side, the other side is the suspension bridge side. Just saying both are wrong does not do justice to the magnitude of wrong.
 
The problem with being a moderate hit home to me with Trump's election. I spent a lot of time railing against both sides. The problem though is best summed up by a quote from Stewart in Big Bang. It is wrong to call a tomato a vegetable. It is very wrong to call it a suspension bridge.

The side that voted against Trump was the vegetable side, the other side is the suspension bridge side. Just saying both are wrong does not do justice to the magnitude of wrong.

Court’s definition of moderate is to point out the flaws in everyone and proclaim those flaws are all equally bad. That’s not moderate. That’s being lazy and cowardly at best.
 
The problem with being a moderate hit home to me with Trump's election. I spent a lot of time railing against both sides. The problem though is best summed up by a quote from Stewart in Big Bang. It is wrong to call a tomato a vegetable. It is very wrong to call it a suspension bridge.

The side that voted against Trump was the vegetable side, the other side is the suspension bridge side. Just saying both are wrong does not do justice to the magnitude of wrong.

Of course not. Ultimately we find ourselves needing to make a decision at times. I chose to vote against Trump and will do so again. Being a moderate allows you the luxury of making decisions based upon the preponderance of evidence rather than the message from biased sources.
 
The problem with being a moderate hit home to me with Trump's election. I spent a lot of time railing against both sides. The problem though is best summed up by a quote from Stewart in Big Bang. It is wrong to call a tomato a vegetable. It is very wrong to call it a suspension bridge.

The side that voted against Trump was the vegetable side, the other side is the suspension bridge side. Just saying both are wrong does not do justice to the magnitude of wrong.
I've talked about steaming piles of broccoli and steaming piles of shit. Both are unpalatable, but...
 
  • Like
Reactions: mashnut
I find the labels "liberal", "conservative", and "moderate" to lend themselves to being one of the major reasons we don't listen to each other. This includes writing off candidates and ideas which actually may have merit.

Unfortunately labeling starts with a candidate having to declare himself either a Democrat or Republican which automatically means all too many won't take his ideas seriously. Even worse many will further attach pejorative labels such as Nazi or Socialist once the candidate identifies with a party.
 
Last edited:
I find the labels "liberal", "conservative", and "moderate" to lend themselves to being one of the major reasons we don't listen to each other. This includes writing off candidates and ideas which actually may have merit.

Unfortunately labeling starts with a candidate having to declare himself either a Democrat or Republican which automatically means all too many won't take his ideas seriously. Even worse many will further attach pejorative labels such as Nazi or Socialist once the candidate identifies with a party.

I would bet most people consider themselves moderate, reasonable, respectful, understanding, whatever word you want. People are afraid to say they are partisan, like it’s some horrible affliction. The same people who are too afraid to say something bad about one group without saying something bad about another.

I’m partisan. I’m bias. I have no problem saying it and have never tried to hide it.
 
Back to the statistics... the virus is likely way underappreciated in terms of its infectivity and overrated in terms of its lethality.

https://www.ozarksfirst.com/life-he...t-missouri-have-tested-positive-for-covid-19/

(MONET) — State health officials have announced that 359 employees and contract workers at a massive pork processing plant in northwest Missouri’s St. Joseph have now tested positive for the coronavirus.

The state Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) announced the latest statistics on Saturday, adding that results from the comprehensive testing continue to arrive on a rolling basis. Additional updates are expected this weekend.

A spokeswoman for DHSS, Lisa Cox, tells Missourinet the vast majority of the Triumph Foods employees were asymptomatic.
 
Back to the statistics... the virus is likely way underappreciated in terms of its infectivity and overrated in terms of its lethality.

https://www.ozarksfirst.com/life-he...t-missouri-have-tested-positive-for-covid-19/

(MONET) — State health officials have announced that 359 employees and contract workers at a massive pork processing plant in northwest Missouri’s St. Joseph have now tested positive for the coronavirus.

The state Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) announced the latest statistics on Saturday, adding that results from the comprehensive testing continue to arrive on a rolling basis. Additional updates are expected this weekend.

A spokeswoman for DHSS, Lisa Cox, tells Missourinet the vast majority of the Triumph Foods employees were asymptomatic.
I think you’re right. This would be in keeping with the studies from southern cal and Stanford that predict hundreds of thousands of people have already been infected in their respective cities/counties.
 
Back to the statistics... the virus is likely way underappreciated in terms of its infectivity and overrated in terms of its lethality.

https://www.ozarksfirst.com/life-he...t-missouri-have-tested-positive-for-covid-19/

(MONET) — State health officials have announced that 359 employees and contract workers at a massive pork processing plant in northwest Missouri’s St. Joseph have now tested positive for the coronavirus.

The state Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) announced the latest statistics on Saturday, adding that results from the comprehensive testing continue to arrive on a rolling basis. Additional updates are expected this weekend.

A spokeswoman for DHSS, Lisa Cox, tells Missourinet the vast majority of the Triumph Foods employees were asymptomatic.

What we do not know is if there is a variation in severity by strain. Some researchers think there is a difference. Some do not. https://www.google.com/amp/s/metro....-deadliest-raging-across-europe-12586269/amp/

If there is a difference in lethality between strains, how much immunity does the lesser strain provide? Again, we do not know.

It may be great news, it might be that we have so many people infected with a lesser strain and have immunity that we are doing great. But that also might not be true.
 
I would bet most people consider themselves moderate, reasonable, respectful, understanding, whatever word you want. People are afraid to say they are partisan, like it’s some horrible affliction. The same people who are too afraid to say something bad about one group without saying something bad about another.

I’m partisan. I’m bias. I have no problem saying it and have never tried to hide it.

This article describes six types of bias which makes us less rational when it comes to our politics.Upon seeing the article comes from the Huffington Post a person's bias might reject reading it. This rejection is an example of how a certain type of bias can interfere with using rational judgement.biased

At any rate, BHR, hope you and others check this article out. It ends with the following,

So while the majority of us may be prone to these errors in rational judgement, we can also be more aware of them. And who knows, if we can manage to re-rationalise how we think, act, and treat one another, perhaps our politics will follow suit.​
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scott S
I find the labels "liberal", "conservative", and "moderate" to lend themselves to being one of the major reasons we don't listen to each other. This includes writing off candidates and ideas which actually may have merit.

Unfortunately labeling starts with a candidate having to declare himself either a Democrat or Republican which automatically means all too many won't take his ideas seriously. Even worse many will further attach pejorative labels such as Nazi or Socialist once the candidate identifies with a party.

I find myself more satisfied and confident in my belief system when I am able to set aside the labels for a moment and measure the value of what was said or done on it's merits. Obama didn't do everything right and Trump has not done everything wrong...MSNBC isn't all wrong and FOX all right (or vice versa) objectivity allows you to see that.

Unfortunately that concept upsets people who tend to be hyper-partisan. To me...that is their weakness and their problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scott S and hoot1
This article describes six types of bias which makes us less rational when it comes to our politics.Upon seeing the article comes from the Huffington Post a person's bias might reject reading it. This rejection is an example of how a certain type of bias can interfere with using rational judgement.biased

At any rate, BHR, hope you and others check this article out. It ends with the following,

So while the majority of us may be prone to these errors in rational judgement, we can also be more aware of them. And who knows, if we can manage to re-rationalise how we think, act, and treat one another, perhaps our politics will follow suit.​

I have zero problem being partisan or bias. I have no problem with others being partisan or bias. If someone can back up a claim with facts/data, I’m biased towards listening to him/her. It’s the people who are too chickenshit to admit their partisanship or biases that I don’t care for.
 
I have zero problem being partisan or bias. I have no problem with others being partisan or bias. If someone can back up a claim with facts/data, I’m biased towards listening to him/her. It’s the people who are too chickenshit to admit their partisanship or biases that I don’t care for.

BHE, given our divided country and dysfunctional Congress because of it, I concede your take on bias represents a majority of active voters.

Please note, I didn't say a majority of Americans. I would argue many potential voters don't participate because the bias prevalent in our politics simply turns them off.

So much for the value we all once shared. That value being one of the foundations upon which our country was founded. That value being democracy as in the right to vote so that our elected officials reflect the values of a majority. In my view, it isn't really a majority when politics drives so many from participating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scott S



The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington (IHME), says it has revised its models for predicting coronavirus, and is now forecasting at least 134,000 deaths in the US by August 4.

Speaking on Monday, IHME Director Dr. Christopher Murray said they have had a “major revision in our modeling strategy.”

His team is now using a hybrid approach, and is gathering “mobility data as it gets reported through four different cell phone providers.” He said most importantly, they are using data to “reflect the effect of premature relaxation of social distance, which has a substantial effect.”

“The effect of this shift in modeling framework, is that the number of deaths that we forecast out to August 4, now increases to 134,000 deaths,” Murray said.

Murray said there is “longer tail of deaths,” meaning it will be a slower decline in some states.

He said he is aware of reports of other coronavirus models that project a sharp increase in US cases and deaths, but added IHME numbers are “nowhere near that level.”

The New York Times said a Trump administration model projected a steep rise in cases and deaths, projecting about 3,000 daily deaths by June 1. A federal spokesperson tells CNN the modeling numbers in the report obtained by the Times are not from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“Our numbers are nowhere near that level on June 1,” Murray said. He added they are projecting 890 daily deaths by June 1.

Murray said while IHME has heard about the model, “our understanding is that model will not be released.”

He continued: “I don't think there's a consensus within the government on different modeling groups on that model.”


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I am amazed it’s so low to be honest. Shortly after the lockdown ends, this is going to tear through society again. Even at current death rates, it hits that number well before August.

I thought I was misreading a zero. The US is hitting 100k by end May? So that's 34K spread over roughly 3 months?
 
Last edited:



The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington (IHME), says it has revised its models for predicting coronavirus, and is now forecasting at least 134,000 deaths in the US by August 4.

Speaking on Monday, IHME Director Dr. Christopher Murray said they have had a “major revision in our modeling strategy.”

His team is now using a hybrid approach, and is gathering “mobility data as it gets reported through four different cell phone providers.” He said most importantly, they are using data to “reflect the effect of premature relaxation of social distance, which has a substantial effect.”

“The effect of this shift in modeling framework, is that the number of deaths that we forecast out to August 4, now increases to 134,000 deaths,” Murray said.

Murray said there is “longer tail of deaths,” meaning it will be a slower decline in some states.

He said he is aware of reports of other coronavirus models that project a sharp increase in US cases and deaths, but added IHME numbers are “nowhere near that level.”

The New York Times said a Trump administration model projected a steep rise in cases and deaths, projecting about 3,000 daily deaths by June 1. A federal spokesperson tells CNN the modeling numbers in the report obtained by the Times are not from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“Our numbers are nowhere near that level on June 1,” Murray said. He added they are projecting 890 daily deaths by June 1.

Murray said while IHME has heard about the model, “our understanding is that model will not be released.”

He continued: “I don't think there's a consensus within the government on different modeling groups on that model.”


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I am amazed it’s so low to be honest. Shortly after the lockdown ends, this is going to tear through society again. Even at current death rates, it hits that number well before August.

I thought I was misreading a zero. The US is hitting 100k by end May? So that's 34K spread over roughly 3 months?
I want to know how many have been infected. The number of deaths in the context of those already infected is more meaningful to me, without obviously meaning to diminish the number of deaths. It’s a staggering number.
 



The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington (IHME), says it has revised its models for predicting coronavirus, and is now forecasting at least 134,000 deaths in the US by August 4.

Speaking on Monday, IHME Director Dr. Christopher Murray said they have had a “major revision in our modeling strategy.”

His team is now using a hybrid approach, and is gathering “mobility data as it gets reported through four different cell phone providers.” He said most importantly, they are using data to “reflect the effect of premature relaxation of social distance, which has a substantial effect.”

“The effect of this shift in modeling framework, is that the number of deaths that we forecast out to August 4, now increases to 134,000 deaths,” Murray said.

Murray said there is “longer tail of deaths,” meaning it will be a slower decline in some states.

He said he is aware of reports of other coronavirus models that project a sharp increase in US cases and deaths, but added IHME numbers are “nowhere near that level.”

The New York Times said a Trump administration model projected a steep rise in cases and deaths, projecting about 3,000 daily deaths by June 1. A federal spokesperson tells CNN the modeling numbers in the report obtained by the Times are not from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“Our numbers are nowhere near that level on June 1,” Murray said. He added they are projecting 890 daily deaths by June 1.

Murray said while IHME has heard about the model, “our understanding is that model will not be released.”

He continued: “I don't think there's a consensus within the government on different modeling groups on that model.”


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I am amazed it’s so low to be honest. Shortly after the lockdown ends, this is going to tear through society again. Even at current death rates, it hits that number well before August.

I thought I was misreading a zero. The US is hitting 100k by end May? So that's 34K spread over roughly 3 months?
Why do we keep paying attention to this model?
 
I want to know how many have been infected. The number of deaths in the context of those already infected is more meaningful to me, without obviously meaning to diminish the number of deaths. It’s a staggering number.

The current 5% fatality rate is the early doors number. But regardless, once you have been admitted, one in four chance of you leaving in a box is scary.
Based on some of the numbers I have seen, eyeballing it, 20+% of confirmed cases are admitted to hospital. That's pretty high a percentage.

Over here only like 8% of confirmed cases are actually admitted. The rest are ether home isolated or in a cared community facility. This way, that leaves a large amount of capacity to treat serious cases at a high care quality.

When the un/intentional herd immunity kicks in, then hospital systems will be overwhelmed and the fatality rate will rise disproportionately. Hockey curve effect like in Spain, Uk and Italy. The one in four will probably rise too and the quality of care diminishes.
 
BHE, given our divided country and dysfunctional Congress because of it, I concede your take on bias represents a majority of active voters.

Please note, I didn't say a majority of Americans. I would argue many potential voters don't participate because the bias prevalent in our politics simply turns them off.

So much for the value we all once shared. That value being one of the foundations upon which our country was founded. That value being democracy as in the right to vote so that our elected officials reflect the values of a majority. In my view, it isn't really a majority when politics drives so many from participating.
Politics is not a thing that happens to us like the weather. It’s a profession that people have engaged in since we stopped clubbing each other over the head for a handful of acorns. If you think “politics” is more “political” than it was in the beginning of our Republic, this is because you don’t know our history. And if you’re unable to locate the source of our current dysfunction, then your view that it’s the amorphous idea of “politics” that’s the problem Is just more evidence that vacuous bromides are a waste of space.

Posts such as this are like political reporting from Boy’s Life magazine.
 
As even your own links suggest (you should try reading them, as I did), the actual numbers on COVID-19 infections and deaths will ultimately prove to be much higher than the current counted totals. Thanks for playing, though. I know you're doing the best you can.

morans.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Circlejoe
As even your own links suggest (you should try reading them, as I did), the actual numbers on COVID-19 infections and deaths will ultimately prove to be much higher than the current counted totals. Thanks for playing, though. I know you're doing the best you can.

morans.jpg
It's always nice when a Cardinals fan comes along and justifies what you already think about Cardinals fans.
 
BHE, given our divided country and dysfunctional Congress because of it, I concede your take on bias represents a majority of active voters.

Please note, I didn't say a majority of Americans. I would argue many potential voters don't participate because the bias prevalent in our politics simply turns them off.

So much for the value we all once shared. That value being one of the foundations upon which our country was founded. That value being democracy as in the right to vote so that our elected officials reflect the values of a majority. In my view, it isn't really a majority when politics drives so many from participating.

Hyper partisanship is an industry. Networks that used to be news gathering and reporting operations are now carefully branded manufacturers created for, and providing product to, a specific audience of "fans". These fans are staunch defenders of "their" brand projecting upon others the label of being false or fake.

This began to grow in the 90s with conservative talk radio. Rush Limbaugh among the early influencers. Liberal talk radio struggled at that time with the industry gathering it's legs near the end of the first Obama term as hyper partisanship exploded. "News" today that is not neatly packaged as red meat for a lazy audience waiting to be told what to think is rare.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Scott S
Of course not. Ultimately we find ourselves needing to make a decision at times. I chose to vote against Trump and will do so again. Being a moderate allows you the luxury of making decisions based upon the preponderance of evidence rather than the message from biased sources.
I hate to ask, but I'm genuinely curious. What preponderance of evidence have you found that would lead you to be a self described economic conservative and social liberal?

Is there a preponderance of evidence- for instance- that you should be pro-choice? When someone on this board claims to be pro-life, I shrug my shoulders and question myself, that they may be right. I haven't read any evidence that I should say, this side is right and the other wrong.

Economically, maybe you have a different definition of economic conservative, but I find it impossible to find any evidence that economic conservatives have been a positive in any meaningful way for their own stated goals. What evidence is there?

Did a rising tide lift all boats? Did tax cuts pay for themselves? Why was 1979 the height of U.S. manufacturing jobs? Why did CEO pay and income/wealth disparity skyrocket beginning in 1987? What was the top marginal tax rate in the 1920's? Why wasn't their a conservative president from Hoover until Reagan(the period that defines American greatness)?

Look at the chart for the velocity of M1 moneystock. Look at income/wealth disparity. Look at the chart for manufacturing jobs/outsourcing/guestworkers. Look at the debt/deficit that each President inherited and what they left for the next guy.

Give me a history book to read. Post an economic chart from FRED and explain exactly where and how economic conservativism has led us to a net positive. I've done a lot of homework, and I can't find this unbiased, moderate preponderance of evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mashnut
I hate to ask, but I'm genuinely curious. What preponderance of evidence have you found that would lead you to be a self described economic conservative and social liberal?

Is there a preponderance of evidence- for instance- that you should be pro-choice? When someone on this board claims to be pro-life, I shrug my shoulders and question myself, that they may be right. I haven't read any evidence that I should say, this side is right and the other wrong.

Economically, maybe you have a different definition of economic conservative, but I find it impossible to find any evidence that economic conservatives have been a positive in any meaningful way for their own stated goals. What evidence is there?

Did a rising tide lift all boats? Did tax cuts pay for themselves? Why was 1979 the height of U.S. manufacturing jobs? Why did CEO pay and income/wealth disparity skyrocket beginning in 1987? What was the top marginal tax rate in the 1920's? Why wasn't their a conservative president from Hoover until Reagan(the period that defines American greatness)?

Look at the chart for the velocity of M1 moneystock. Look at income/wealth disparity. Look at the chart for manufacturing jobs/outsourcing/guestworkers. Look at the debt/deficit that each President inherited and what they left for the next guy.

Give me a history book to read. Post an economic chart from FRED and explain exactly where and how economic conservativism has led us to a net positive. I've done a lot of homework, and I can't find this unbiased, moderate preponderance of evidence.

Well, lets start with correcting the labels. I am generally in the camp of "fiscal" conservatism rather than "economic". Fiscal being a more tightly defined set of disciplines including revenue, budget and size of gov. Taxation is a subset where I do find myself occasionally at odds with prevailing conservative thinking.

Also, I am a social moderate not a liberal. So the two (now correct) are congruous.
 
Maybe you're expecting more from it than I am. It's a model, after all, not a magic eight ball. I think it's been quite useful so far.

I think the model is trying to guess the winner's time in the Indy 500. After the first lap, it has an answer. But then there is a big crash and things slow way down for 15 laps, now there is a different answer. Then things run smooth for 30 laps, and there is a different answer. None are really wrong, one really can't predict what the exact race time will be with any real hope of accuracy. Since we have really never had a pandemic in modern times, how we would respond was totally a guess. Then we responded better than thought, so the models compensated. Now fatigue and the models have to adjust. It's just like the 500.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT