Coronavirus thread

[Que]

Spending vast sums around the world on R&D and equipment is necessary to achieve public health goals, and one of the spillover benefits of US spending may turn out to be a vaccine that saves millions of lives all over the world.  Since Europe failed to lead - again - the US sort of did.  I mean, Europeans didn't lead here, they didn't lead in 2007-2008, and they didn't lead even during the Yugoslav Wars.  Maybe one day European leaders will live up to their limitless potential; maybe they will lead during the next big crisis.  (jk)

Money needs to be invested, absolutely. And in hindsight all the SARS research projects that were aborted after the previous epidemic should have continued instead.

But what this pandemic has shown is that regardless of the availability of scientific solutions or financial resources, there are other factors that influence the level of preparedness as a society. Policies that are based on scientific insights and are executed through professional expertise is one important factor. The general access of the population to proper healthcare, delivered by a system with a high level of coordination  and cooperation is another. Third is a preexisting general economic safety net in case people are unable to work due to sickness or quarantine. Last but not least is a high level of trust in government or by lack thereof: at least a readiness to follow the rules.

The USA failed on all these points, and European countries did significantly - and sufficiently - better in comparison. No amount of administrative and political coordination in the US (or money) could have made up for these flaws.

Germany is frequently mentioned as a shining example. It did well but, as Jo mentioned, it also had some luck with a low level of initial exposure to the virus. But let me mention Greece as another example: no money, no leverage on the international stage and an underfunded healthcare system that is hanging by a thread. But realising its vulnerability, it acted early, quickly and decisively. You don't need money to survive this crisis, you need good government first and foremost.

No quibbles with the critique on the lack of any coordinated efforts and leadership by European countries: they failed utterly in that respect! But the US didn't lead either, not even sort of.  Undermining the position of the WHO and trying to "grab" whatever medical supplies and control over possible vaccines, is no leadership in my book.

The USA did however successfully intervene to stabilise the international financial markets, but this was purely out if self interest. And the effects might unfortunately be short lived - if the virus continues to spiral out of control in the Americas (and India and possibly Russia) I don't see how a global economic crash can be avoided. In that respect the inability of the USA to handle this health crisis will undo us all....

Q

[Todd]

But the US didn't lead either, not even sort of.

But it did lead, at least sort of.  Picking potential winners in the midst of chaos and funding projects quickly while many established powers dawdle and bicker is something leaders do.  Europe failed yet again.

"Undermining" the WHO is another example of leadership.  It is leadership people who prefer the existing international order dislike, but it is leadership, as is relying on political and economic strength to procure necessary resources in the midst of crisis, even at the expense of allies.  Some allies are more important than others. 

The pandemic is worsening fissures in the international system, and creating new ones.  That's OK.  No international system lasts forever.   

In that respect the inability of the USA to handle this health crisis will undo us all....

If it does, that merely demonstrates a failure of leadership over decades all over the world, starting with Europe, the wealthiest, best educated part of the world.  It if happens, Europe will have failed yet again.

[Biffo]

Money needs to be invested, absolutely. And in hindsight all the SARS research projects that were aborted after the previous epidemic should have continued instead.

But what this pandemic has shown is that regardless of the availability of scientific solutions or financial resources, there are other factors that influence the level of preparedness as a society. Policies that are based on scientific insights and are executed through professional expertise is one important factor. The general access of the population to proper healthcare, delivered by a system with a high level of coordination  and cooperation is another. Third is a preexisting general economic safety net in case people are unable to work due to sickness or quarantine. Last but not least is a high level of trust in government or by lack thereof: at least a readiness to follow the rules.

The USA failed on all these points, and European countries did significantly - and sufficiently - better in comparison. No amount of administrative and political coordination in the US (or money) could have made up for these flaws.

Germany is frequently mentioned as a shining example. It did well but, as Jo mentioned, it also had some luck with a low level of initial exposure to the virus. But let me mention Greece as another example: no money, no leverage on the international stage and an underfunded healthcare system that is hanging by a thread. But realising its vulnerability, it acted early, quickly and decisively. You don't need money to survive this crisis, you need good government first and foremost.

No quibbles with the critique on the lack of any coordinated efforts and leadership by European countries: they failed utterly in that respect! But the US didn't lead either, not even sort of.  Undermining the position of the WHO and trying to "grab" whatever medical supplies and control over possible vaccines, is no leadership in my book.

The USA did however successfully intervene to stabilise the international financial markets, but this was purely out if self interest. And the effects might unfortunately be short lived - if the virus continues to spiral out of control in the Americas (and India and possibly Russia) I don't see how a global economic crash can be avoided. In that respect the inability of the USA to handle this health crisis will undo us all....

Q

That is not going to happen.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/eu-plan-to-tackle-covid-19-drug-shortages-hit-by-health-budget-cuts/ar-BB173scy?ocid=msedgntp

[Que]

But it did lead, at least sort of.  Picking potential winners in the midst of chaos and funding projects quickly while many established powers dawdle and bicker is something leaders do.  Europe failed yet again.

"Undermining" the WHO is another example of leadership.  It is leadership people who prefer the existing international order dislike, but it is leadership, as is relying on political and economic strength to procure necessary resources in the midst of crisis, even at the expense of allies.  Some allies are more important than others. 

The pandemic is worsening fissures in the international system, and creating new ones.  That's OK.  No international system lasts forever.   

If it does, that merely demonstrates a failure of leadership over decades all over the world, starting with Europe, the wealthiest, best educated part of the world.  It if happens, Europe will have failed yet again.

Europe is divided.... as it has been as long as we can remember. And now the US is (internally) divided too.

Tearing down the existing world order is relatively easy for a big player as the US and certainly no sign of international leadership. Leadership would be shown by building a new order. But by acting as a geopolitical hooligan, Trump will gamble the last bit of the political credit the US has in the world away.

What will remain is the economic might of the US... for now... Because the economic might of the US is highly dependent on the existing world order. When that goes down, so will ultimately the economic might of the US. People at the Federal Reserve, the Treasury and the State Department understand that. Unfortunately they seem pretty much alone in that realisation these days.

And as things are developing, I don't see any credible replacement for the leadership position of the US.
As a consequence, we might have to face a long period of geopolitical instability until a new world order settles.
IMO the pandemic will trigger the major geopolitical shift that has been in the making for the past decade or so.

Q

[Todd]

And now the US is (internally) divided too.

The US has never been quite as politically unified as the common misrepresentation of the 20th Century post war years one sees in print and online.  The US has been as divided as it is now  - or worse - multiple times in the past.  There is a tendency, however, to place special emphasis on the here and now, and to believe that it is special and unique.  Maybe it is, what with Covid and all.

While it is of course true that the existing international system benefits the US, it is also true that the US is less dependent on trade than any other major economy, and it has been since the 19th Century.  The US should still engage with the world economically, to be sure, but it also has resources at its disposal that very few other countries do.  It is true that a disintegration of the existing system will have negative consequences for the US, but so does remaining in and maintaining the existing system. 

The world is in the throes of moving toward a multi-polar world more akin to what existed for centuries before the distorted and unsustainable post-war system.  It is precisely because of this that the US should endeavor to destroy the EU, or at least completely hobble it.  It can be like a mini UN and it wouldn't matter.  If Europe could somehow come up with a coherent approach to the world, it could be a meaningful rival.  That should not be allowed to happen.  I know that is an unpopular view, and I know that Biden will attempt to move back to something closer to what existed pre-Trump, as will various others in both parties, and Europe may still come up with a unified approach to domestic and international governance, but that seems even less likely that the US disintegrating and become a third or fourth rate power like those that constitute Europe anytime soon.  Even a diminished US will enjoy its geographical and physical resource advantages, as well as a host of political and social advantages.  Maybe China eats America's lunch this century.  Americans will still be rich and powerful, maybe just relatively less so.  Oh well.

[arpeggio]

The last time the country was as divided as this was back in the sixties.  Back then we had the Viet Nam War that killed 58,000 Americans over a ten year period.

[arpeggio]

I can not figure how to download this video into this post so here is the link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUiDLcp_hIw

[Que]

I admit I had a good laugh, but of the situation in the US is very serious:



We looking at the number of virus related deaths per day.
Now, the US has a large population so the hight of the peak of a couple months ago isn't that odd.
The problem is that the number of deaths is going up again. And off course that's looking at the possible unfortunate outcome of an infection after many weeks. 
Other graphs show that the number of new cases is soaring. And we know there is about a month between infection and hospitalisation. Hospitalizations will go up exponentially, and so will the number of deaths.
Soon the US will be back to square one...

Any economic damage that has been the result of containment measures sofar, will basically have been for nothing.
From an economic point of view the US will have wasted billions and billions of dollars.

The trillion dollar question is: is the US going to try again?    Does it have a choice?

Q

[Herman]

Make that trillions of dollars.

However, reports show that Mnuchin and Trump have made sure that a large portion of that relief money has gotten into the hands of GOP donors.

[Florestan]

Todd, you sort of contradict yourself.

The world is in the throes of moving toward a multi-polar world more akin to what existed for centuries before the distorted and unsustainable post-war system.  It is precisely because of this that the US should endeavor to destroy the EU, or at least completely hobble it.  It can be like a mini UN and it wouldn't matter.  If Europe could somehow come up with a coherent approach to the world, it could be a meaningful rival.  That should not be allowed to happen. 

What you basically say is that the US should endeavor to destroy or hobble any potentially meaningful rival, thus preserving precisely the "distorted and unsustainable post-war system" and not allowing to happen exactly the "multi-polar world more akin to what existed for centuries".

Besides, how is EU a rival to the US? In one form or another it's been in existence for several decades and never posed the slightest economical or military threat to the US, on the contrary, both it and its member states have generally been staunch allies and sincere friends of the US. What makes you think this will radically change in the future?

[Todd]

The trillion dollar question is: is the US going to try again?    Does it have a choice?

The US federal government will enact one additional fiscal spending package before the election, and more thereafter.  Individual fiscal spending packages will exceed a trillion dollars, and cumulatively they will exceed multiple trillions of dollars.

The Fed will continue to engage in expanded quantitative easing, buying non-traditional assets (eg, high yield debt, municipal bonds).  The Fed will also continue to operate swap lines for other, lesser countries and entities.  For instance, the ECB still can't get its act together and has to come hat in hand to the Fed.  It's really rather disgraceful.

Todd, you sort of contradict yourself.

What you basically say is that the US should endeavor to destroy or hobble any potentially meaningful rival, thus preserving precisely the "distorted and unsustainable post-war system" and not allowing to happen exactly the "multi-polar world more akin to what existed for centuries".

Besides, how is EU a rival to the US? In one form or another it's been in existence for several decades and never posed the slightest economical or military threat to the US, on the contrary, both it and its member states have generally been staunch allies and sincere friends of the US. What makes you think this will radically change in the future?

You got it wrong.  Try again.

[drogulus]

     The alliance of cooperators has a fairly minimal set of requirements to allow the membership to be fairly wide. Ideology must give way to pragmatics. An interesting feature of such alliances is that a country wants to be a member but isn't forced to stay. It's in the beliefs and the practice.

     Another point is that what cooperation is for doesn't require that any opponent rise up as a major threat. The web of cooperators is desirable in itself both for resolution of member conflicts and its outward facing aspect. The only way it will become obsolete is by the disinclination of members to continue to be part of a cooperative arrangement. Wanting to be part of another cooperative group with a super ideology isn't probable.

     Critics of alliances don't have options to offer that are attractive in the real world. What should Japan do, or Australia? Taiwan is an economic powerhouse threatened by Chicoms. Who should decide they should be sacrificed, the U.S., the Taiwanese themselves, who?

     I don't think multipolarity invalidates the alliance system. Nothing in the real world does until members don't want to be in it.

[Florestan]

You got it wrong. 

Then please correct me.

[T. D.]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/a-public-health-employee-predicted-floridas-coronavirus-catastrophe-then-she-was-fired-this-is-everything-i-was-trying-to-warn-184810565.html

"More people are gonna die," Rebekah Jones wrote to her mother and sisters on Facebook. It was April 26, a warm spring Sunday in Tallahassee, Fla., and she was just finishing work at the Florida Department of Health, where she was managing the state's much-praised coronavirus dashboard, which she had also created.

"I feel sick," the 30-year-old doctoral student continued.

The exchange marked the beginning of an exceptionally turbulent period for Jones, who was demonized by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis as a rogue employee while also being celebrated by his detractors as a brave truth teller willing to stand up to political power.

In a whistleblower complaint Jones filed last Thursday with the Florida Commission on Human Relations, her attorneys alleged that she was fired by the state's Department of Health for "refusing to publish misleading health data."

DeSantis's office did not respond to requests for comment.

"We wanted to be wrong," Jones told Yahoo News. "What we're seeing right now is actually far worse than what we anticipated." Back in May, DeSantis's combative press secretary dismissed as "alarmist" new projections showing the state suffering 4,000 mortalities from COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. Florida now has more than 5,000 coronavirus fatalities.

[Karl Henning]

The Unchecked Rise in Cases Turns Deadly: This Week in COVID-19 Data, July 16

The US is approaching half a million new cases of COVID-19 each week. States with major outbreaks including Arizona, California, Florida, and Texas all saw record high weekly hospitalizations and deaths. Meanwhile, worsening outbreaks in many other states threaten to increase the pandemic's death toll in the coming weeks.

So why hasn't the USA been able to contain the spread of the virus?

Lack of responsible leadership, exacerbated by a large swath of the population who are wilfully blind to the incompetence.

[SimonNZ]

The latest episode of The Axe Files is a one hour interview with Anthony Fauci:

https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-axe-files-presented-by-the-university-of-chicago-institute/e/76404532?autoplay=true

[Que]

The latest episode of The Axe Files is a one hour interview with Anthony Fauci:

https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-axe-files-presented-by-the-university-of-chicago-institute/e/76404532?autoplay=true

Very interesting!

At 0:35 Fauci gives two reasons for the fact that the US hasn't "brought the virus back down to the baseline":
1) the containment measures never got to the right level;
2) Americans have an issue with authority.

Q

[Que]

The US federal government will enact one additional fiscal spending package before the election, and more thereafter.  Individual fiscal spending packages will exceed a trillion dollars, and cumulatively they will exceed multiple trillions of dollars.

The Fed will continue to engage in expanded quantitative easing, buying non-traditional assets (eg, high yield debt, municipal bonds).  The Fed will also continue to operate swap lines for other, lesser countries and entities.  For instance, the ECB still can't get its act together and has to come hat in hand to the Fed.  It's really rather disgraceful.

All points happily granted. The US is able to throw much more money at this than it already did, I'm sure.

But my point is that money alone is not going to fix this.
To get the virus under control, the US will have to go into another - and this time more coordinated and thorough - lockdown.

Is there the political and popular will (and unity) to see such a painful process through?
If not, every dollar spent - whether billions or trillions - will be wasted.

Q

[Herman]

Going in a second lockdown would mean the Orange Man would be admitting failure, so that's unlikely.

[Herman]

Interesting that even Dr Fauci construes "the American persona" as "indepent" and averse to "authority" and he calls it "the spirit that formed our country".

That's a myth, basically built in the era of Hollywood westerns. The seventeenth and eighteenth century Americans were perfectly willing to accept authority.

And even now people are slaves to authority, look at the idolatry on the faces of people in the crowds of Trump rallies. They were willing to lay down their lives for a good "lock her up" chant. The only problem is that authority people are looking for is alrgely from snake-oil salesmen like Trump, Limbaugh and Hannity.