Is it time to panic yet?

stache,
I tried to reach Citibank by phone yesterday and waited on hold for over 30 minutes before giving up.

@Aaron2 - Brilliant.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/20/goldman-sees-an-unprecedented-stop-of-economic-activity-with-2nd-quarter-gdp-contracting-by-24percent.html

30Y: Well, I guess you've answered the original question posed by George. Yes, it is time to panic.

All kidding aside, those numbers are horrendous. The projections of 500k-5MM(!) job losses in April alone and unemployment likely peaking at >10% should give anyone pause.

Our politicians have basically decided that it's better to shut down the economy indefinitely than to accept some number of deaths. Fine, but only for so long. We can't keep the country shut indefinitely. If we don't have a better solution by early summer, we may have to reopen the economy and accept that there will be some deaths, just as there are deaths from many activities and diseases. We didn't stop selling opiods despite 46,200 preventable overdose deaths last year, and eventually we may have to accept some number of preventable Covid19 deaths.

We could do quite a bit more with an economy that was running vs one that is at a dead standstill. This cure is worst then the disease. 2017/18 flu season...45 million infected 810k hospitalizations 66k (50k for 65+) deaths. But no shutdown

I think enemy, which by all known facts is highly contagious - multiple time that of flu, needs to be better understood for the panic to stop. Only 265 deaths so far on March 20th. I am hoping if by the end next week less than 1000 people have died (assuming mostly are people in their 80s or pre-existing serious medical conditions), there will be talk of re-opening the economy.

Unlikely, I think. Confirmed cases are still growing exponentially (10x per week), and there is a ~1 week lag on infection and another ~1 week lag on death. Add in the fact that testing has been spotty, meaning you have a poor picture of how lockdowns are working, and it means the data won’t be there.

Unlikely, I think. Confirmed cases are still growing exponentially (10x per week), and there is a ~1 week lag on infection and another ~1 week lag on death. Add in the fact that testing has been spotty, meaning you have a poor picture of how lockdowns are working, and it means the data won’t be there.

Unlikely, I think. Confirmed cases are still growing exponentially (10x per week), and there is a ~1 week lag on infection and another ~1 week lag on death. Add in the fact that testing has been spotty, meaning you have a poor picture of how lockdowns are working, and it means the data won’t be there.

Unlikely, I think. Confirmed cases are still growing exponentially (10x per week), and there is a ~1 week lag on infection and another ~1 week lag on death. Add in the fact that testing has been spotty, meaning you have a poor picture of how lockdowns are working, and it means the data won’t be there.

Unlikely, I think. Confirmed cases are still growing exponentially (10x per week), and there is a ~1 week lag on infection and another ~1 week lag on death. Add in the fact that testing has been spotty, meaning you have a poor picture of how lockdowns are working, and it means the data won’t be there.

Unlikely, I think. Confirmed cases are still growing exponentially (10x per week), and there is a ~1 week lag on infection and another ~1 week lag on death. Add in the fact that testing has been spotty, meaning you have a poor picture of how lockdowns are working, and it means the data won’t be there.

Unlikely, I think. Confirmed cases are still growing exponentially (10x per week), and there is a ~1 week lag on infection and another ~1 week lag on death. Add in the fact that testing has been spotty, meaning you have a poor picture of how lockdowns are working, and it means the data won’t be there.

Nada, Welcome back to posting. Could one view the data as follows?

The data on deaths (serious cases) was not delayed but identification /reporting of mild infections was delayed due to a lack of testing.

>> Our politicians have basically decided that it's better to shut down the economy indefinitely than to accept some number of deaths.

How many deaths do you think “some number” is? I figure it’s a few million in the US unabated. Even if you value a human life at zero (which is wrong), the GDP impact of letting a plague run its course isn’t good.

300, I think so. Deaths are not underreported for the most parts. Cases have been underreported, but that has been changing.

Nada, So we had 5600 reported cases yesterday likely due to increased availability of testing. Without having any info beyond what is in the news and reported data in other countries, it seems (perhaps my hope) pretty close to peak daily reported infections looking forward.

Given the rate of growth, and length of spread in other countries.. I think 100k cases in NYC by May is a pretty reasonable projection.

Keep in mind the asymptomatic carrier rate seems to be pretty high as well... so that 100k is just the number who feel sick, and are sick (or rich/famous) enough to get tested & test positive. Could be multiples of that who are carriers (and therefore can get their immunodeficient / elder family members sick).
They tested the whole Nets team when one guy felt sick and found 4 total had it, the sick guy plus 3 guys who felt fine.

Note the city ICUs are already at capacity. It was reported there was roughly 1 death per hour from this yesterday in the city.

Government is being pretty clear they expect this to not even peak until May/June .. even July now.
Best case then let’s say it gets worse for 2 more months, then 2 more months of recovery to get back to where we are today and then it’s almost August.

My office was going to send us all home this week for 2 weeks, then moved up the timetable to end of last week, and then midweek extended it to at least 4 weeks. Things are moving fast and I could see white collar workers at home for the whole spring at this rate. Walking around the city it’s pretty shocking to see the amount of business closures. I think the unemployment numbers are going to shock a lot of people in a few weeks. There’s no way the market doesn’t have another leg down when the reality hits the numbers.

We are probably going to go back to under-reporting soon. 2 weeks ago there weren’t enough tests, last week they stepped up the testing, next week there is no need / capacity to test those not needing hospitalization.

Friend in Paris went to the hospital recently because she was in bad shape after a few days of shortness of breath. After some hours & determining hospitalization was not necessary, they sent her home untested. I also know of NYC folks who have it but are not being tested.

I also know a couple of who don’t want to be tested (mild cases if it is Coronavirus) but fortunately are taking precautions to isolate themselves.

I also know a couple of individuals who don’t want to be tested (mild cases if it is Coronavirus) but fortunately are taking precautions to isolate themselves.

My company went to mandatory work-from-home 2 weeks ago and was ahead of the curve. Really, it was only 1 week ago that a sizable dent was made city-wide. And only in the past day or so has the city gone to heavy-lockdown.

This thing is on a ~5 days transmission cycle. 2 weeks ago I’d guess 3 transmissions per person, last week around 2, and now (hopefully) down to 1. That’s a lot transmissions working their way toward symptoms.

If you know a couple of people, and I know a couple of people, that probably means we are in the 0.1-1% range exposed as a week or so ago.

According to some of the scientists quoted here, worst case scenario for America would be 2.2 million deaths. Our current population is about 330 million.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/20/opinion/sunday/coronavirus-outcomes.html?0p19G=0038

I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to posit that the reason things got this bad is because we failed to "panic" quickly enough.

In retrospect, agree. But I think much bigger issue was CDC failure on test kits. There is also another perspective that we are panicking too much. It is hard to say who is right. One will have to evaluate economic damage vs percentage increase in daily total deaths. Currently there is no social or political appetite for that.

Purely from perspective point of view, American death rate is 8.8 per 1000 per year. Appx 8000 per day spread across the country and including natural causes. Biggest real issue is concentration in NYC burdening the hospitals.

It's funny how changing circumstances change your views of people. In hindsight, I think then-Mayor Bloomberg's intrusive-nanny-state action to keep everyone from smoking in bars -- an action I strongly disagreed with at the time -- will probably end up saving thousands of lives in New York.

How so?

Friday I did a grocery run and there was a (Latin) guy stocking a shelf, complaining to a cashier he didn't feel well. Cashier and I were telling him to go to Bellevue [ Side note, Bellevue does not charge $ and asks no questions regarding green card etc.]. It wasn't until after I got home that I started thinking. Guys if you are stocking on non perishables it's probably a good idea to take them home, keep them in the bag for a few days and then unpack/use them. Gives the time for any virus on the container to die. Plus wash your hands of course.

PS Same goes for any non perishable/ anything that can wait parcel being delivered. And accept it wearing some kind of glove. NY Times article -https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/21/business/coronavirus-ups-fedex-xpo-workers.html

We are locked up at home because we did not / still do not have sufficient testing capacity to aggressively test & sort the well from the unwell. South Korea and Taiwan were way ahead of the curve and so only had to quarantine the actually sick.

Re: death rate normally being 8.8 per 1000
If the projections for COVID19 being in the range of 1-2M dead in US then thats a 40-80% increase in normal rate of deaths.
Further - it's not just the deaths, the numbers are showing a 5% ICU admittance rate.. many of whom will have permanent lung damage from the virus & extended time on ventilators.

Also consider this is highly regionally concentrated, with ~50% of all US cases being NY state / 30% being NYC.
Quite similar to China (Wuhan) and Italy (Lombardy/Veneto).
So we will have a larger % of our metro area population impacted both in terms of long term injury and death.
We had our first NY death (and 500 cases) about 8 days ago, and now we are at 80 deaths (and 12,000 cases) , so still looking near exponential.

Best case is this is mostly concentrated in NY & CA, and our local economies are on pause for 2-3 months while the remaining national economy carries on at closer to full capacity.

Steve, Do you have the time period of the following and how many of these would have died from other causes - old age, heart attack etc - in the same time period?

“If the projections for COVID19 being in the range of 1-2M dead in US then thats a 40-80% increase in normal rate of deaths.”

In case some one missed it. CDC screwed up big time - main agency at Federal level for prevention of this type of disease. And when it comes to Govt agencies, while the head of the agency should be clearly held responsible but real decisions are made by long serving agency employees. I know our tendency is to blame politicians but they can only do damage control as I think all of them are doing now supported by medical professionals like Dr Fauci and private sector.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cdcs-restrictive-testing-guidelines-hid-the-coronavirus-epidemic-11584882001?mod=mhp

An estate agency in London says that sales volume is down 91%. There was an uptick in Dec and Jan, as in NYC, but this past week, activity halted.

https://www.mansionglobal.com/articles/coronavirus-halting-real-estate-activity-in-the-u-k-213298

@300_mercer - I am confused. Do you blame Dr Fauci? He is one of the longest serving CDC agency employees, and if any CDC career employee was calling the shots, it was him. He has been head of
infectious diseases forever. I’ve heard him speak before and he has been warning of risks of pandemic for decades.

Fauci is NIH.

CDC is control and prevention as in test kits issues. Fauci is research and advice with no control, testing, execution authority. That is CDC.

So is CDC; this is too inside-the-beltway, but you have to understand both the inter and intra-agency processes and hierarchy. Beware of biases in all news publications left-leaning and right-leaning. Dr. Fauci has been calling all the shots within career employees’ authority.

https://apic.org/Resource_/TinyMceFileManager/Advocacy-PDFs/outline_of_govt_health_agencies.pdf

Start here: https://www.hhs.gov/about/agencies/orgchart/index.html
I have a lot of experience in the interagency and intra-agency process. I can tell I am not going to be able to convince you, so carry on, but all my sources in USG say that Dr. Fauci is the career HHS employee (CDC and NIH are both part of HHS) who has been calling the shots. Any other DC folks, feel free to weigh in.

And I say "calling the shots," meaning giving the career employee recommendations. The political appointees do ultimately call the shots, but lots of shots are called before things are even escalated to political appointee radar. Reading news coverage of any of these decisions is painful.

I do not have enough inside govt info. Is it Fauci who decided that US needs to develop its own test kit and process rather than use one of the types used by other countries?

See if you can find Fauci's Congressional testimony from last week (or maybe the week before somewhere). He explained the failure with test kits to Congress. I'll see if I can get it for you and send it to you offline. You have no idea the sh*t show that goes on even within the Executive Branch during times like this, but there is a hierarchy even when offices are supposedly parallel on the org chart. WHO did not offer test kits to US and US did not ask because rich countries are supposed to take care of themselves.

Let me look for Fauci's explanation.

You will see that he stepped in and answered for Redfield. Fauci was integral to establishing policy that CDC followed, which policy flows from budget constraints as well as the way our health system is structured. Not sure if you will get all the information from the Congressional testimony, because I don't know if the WHO not offering test kits and our not asking for them was part of that testimony, but I know that was an issue as well. I wrote elsewhere on here that Trump alone is not to blame for eliminating pandemic preparedness funding; Congress had to agree, and the fact of the matter is that Republicans did not value the issue. I will note also that I don't think they really regret that; I come from a long line of Republicans who are just fine with the herd being thinned through disease.

I viewed that as Fauci taking one for his friend Redfield with his gentle and calm manner. But eventually where the decision making mistake took place in CDC will come out in press. I do believe that every one at CDC only means to help and do not want people to die. The same way, Congress - both democrats and Republicans - didn't expect something of this magnitude and type when they cut funding.

"We had our first NY death (and 500 cases) about 8 days ago, and now we are at 80 deaths (and 12,000 cases) , so still looking near exponential."

George, during the 2017 flu season, deaths at this point were 50-60k. Estimates of infection 45,million, over 800k hospitalizations. Why no lockdown back then nor blow by blow coverage on obvious health disaster ?

sorry, meant steve123, not george

I could not disagree more with this statement: "But eventually where the decision making mistake took place in CDC will come out in press." I was with USG during 9/11 and during Iraq war and immediate reconstruction efforts, and the press never got anything right. Both parties strategically leak half-truths to spin whatever is going on, and it drives those who are in the trenches mad. I am about as centrist as they come and was equally frustrated by the political appointees and elected representatives from both parties. We are all going to interpret current events and written articles through the filter of our own experiences, and I respect that you believe nobody expected the magnitude of what we are seeing, but I still believe that some who voted to cut funding did and would do it again. And while I think more Republicans fall into that camp, I suspect there are some Democrats who do as well. The policies we have are a reflection of our values. A lot of people saw this coming and have been sounding the alarm forever, but we as a society decided we didn't care and here are.

nada (welcome back! hi!) as I understand it, the course of the disease is that when things go bad, there's lung involvement which leads to a type of pneumonia that might even require mechanical ventilation until it resolves. By cutting down on smoking, Bloomberg public-health'd New Yorkers into being a population with relatively healthy lungs ... better able to fight off/through the pneumonia.

I was being dense as well. But thank you for explaining. I actually liked smoking ban as before the smoking ban I always came back after an evening out with a smoke induced headache and had to shower. I am sure cleaners were not happy with the smoking ban.

This article is pretty thin, but once stuff like this is in the press there is little question where we are headed (ITYS):
https://therealdeal.com/2020/03/22/deals-fall-through-and-agents-struggle-to-sell-over-coronavirus-measures/

Hi back at you front_porch!

That’s what I thought you were implying, but do you really think the motivation (and effect) was to get smokers to quit? On the margin, probably less smoking & less new smokers I suppose.

FWIW, based on nothing I have hypothesized similar things. Small children are least affected because their oxygen capacity is super-high while elders’ oxygen capacity is super-low. FWIW, smoker friend is having a rough time with the illness. Marathoner+ friends were over it after a few days of fever, no breathing issues. Yet another reason to make sure you are taxing your cardiovascular system as you age...

Swell.... so now Bloomberg is going to propose taxing poor people's cardiovascular systems "for their own good"?

For example, see how population-average oxygen capacity peaks at age ~10 and halves by age ~70:

https://o.b5z.net/i/u/10129364/i/Vo2_max_Norms.jpg

>> Swell.... so now Bloomberg is going to propose taxing poor people's cardiovascular systems "for their own good"?
No need, there’s one already there: your social security payments are not adjusted based on life expectancy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/opinion/coronavirus-economy.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Rarely agree with Tom, but he hit the nail on the head

Either we let many of us get the coronavirus, recover and get back to work — while doing our utmost to protect those most vulnerable to being killed by it. Or, we shut down for months to try to save everyone everywhere from this virus — no matter their risk profile — and kill many people by other means, kill our economy and maybe kill our future. Thomas Friedman

@knewbie - Heard an interview with Jeffrey Sachs where he was saying the same thing and I feel like that is where I come down too. I don’t agree with my right wing family members on much these days, but I find myself agreeing with them on this. And the fact that Tom Friedman and Jeffrey Sachs are articulating these thoughts makes clear that the reaction does not fall along party lines. This doesn’t mean I’m not following direction given by the government here; just questioning what the right government response should be. Policy makers likely to be criticized no matter what they decide.

Exactly. That is a why I have sympathy for politicians except De Blasio when it comes to Corona Virus. They are doing the best they can. Fed has done a lot already very fast and deserves a lot of praise. Now if Republicans and Democrats can put their difference aside for a few days quickly agree to a fiscal stimulus package. That would be something!!

“Policy makers likely to be criticized no matter what they decide.”

@300_mercer - Yes, we are in agreement on broader point of let's stop trying to place blame anywhere and figure out how to get through this, which brings me to next question, which I ask purely for information seeking purposes because I don't have an informed opinion here: Do we really need a stimulus package at this point? Can't we just wait a few weeks and see what happens? OR are we where we were in 2008 where entire economy will collapse without action? The package they are discussing strikes me as an endorsement of the "go ahead and live paycheck to paycheck because someone will always bail you out!" philosophy. Again, purely seeking information here, so anyone can feel free to pummel my ignorance; I can take it. And to be clear, I favor progressive redistributive policies in many areas lest anyone confuse me with a member of the Tea Party, which I admit this post might sound a bit like.

I am usually on the conservative side. The fact is that many Americans just do not make enough money to save much. Most service industry workers will fall into that category. At least they are working and are not dependent on govt. I feel it is govt’s moral obligation to provide them some money to sustain themselves - pay for rent and food - for something they have no control over. In addition, fiscal stimulus from the govt will prevent bankruptcies of many small businesses who provide employment. Lastly, it is just like breaking a fall. Softer landing makes it easier to get up.

And I view it very different from welfare rolls. It is temporary help just like unemployment for people who were trying hard to make a living for themselves. Perhaps Buffett will declare a huge dividend from Berkshire so that he can donate hard cash for medical care rather than complaining his taxes are not high enough.

I wonder if the all-knowing, omnipotent Keith B still thinks the Corona virus is "much ado about nothing" which should be revisited in 3 months. If he does, he needs a psychiatrist and a reality check. Get ready for the National Guard, New York City. It sucks big time.

There's only talk about finances and the stock market, but we may have bigger problems in the coming weeks.

I fear the powers that be aren't even considering what happens if we throw $4 trillion at this, it doesn't move the needle, and what position that will put us in versus taking a different tack from the outset.

We will need closer to 10trln by time this is done. Think mortgage and assets backed securities, commercial sector, how do rents and mortgages get paid. This is gonna be part of the equation that needs to get solved otherwise next leg of this will get ugly. Fed may monetize everything, scary

MCR, we need massive massive stimulus and massive QE. Outside of the virus and health side, The shadow banking system is in real trouble and mass liquidations for redemptions, margin calls force the need for dollars. Bank write downs didn't start yet. Corporate and high yield debt market mayhem yet to be fully realized. The depth of this in plumbing of finance sector is scary.

What's the path to getting that done without printing so much money that inflation spikes and then so do interest rates?

https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20200323a.htm

Just happened. There it is

Inflation worries are not warranted at this time. Massive deflation is the kill shot. Reflation is the goal from massive deflation. Inflation, there will be a time for that when global currency crisis occurs as there is a race to debase. Many think that is the end game

Yes, deflation is the kill shot, I don't fear inflation. But what do you mean by 'many think that is the end game.'

global currency crisis occurs as there is a race to debase.

FED just started unlimited and open end QE, dangerous path ahead.

https://medium.com/@tombarrackjr/preventing-covid-19-from-infecting-the-commercial-mortgage-market-e7444701745e

"As a direct consequence of the necessary response measures to COVID-19, high performing mortgage loans across the entire commercial real estate sector (approximately $16 trillion in aggregate), which had previously been grounded in solid economic fundamentals, are suddenly experiencing a temporary meltdown in cash flows. "

I always wondered with great curiosity how you "regulars" had so much time to theorize and otherwise blow smoke up your private parts, but now it's truly scary. I doubt anyone knows OR CARES about all your economic theories in these times. At least it gives you something to blab about in lieu of jumping our your window (if you're lucky enough to live on a high floor). LOL

You don't really need that high a floor.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2017/06/26/can-you-survive-25-foot-fall/428384001/

DaVenezia, Why do not you contribute something relevant? People are free to post whatever they like and other people should be able to question their opinions, thoughts and logical flaws. Hopefully without being nasty. And there is “ignore” button.

I'm with 300 on this. Now is not the time for stick poking. This thread is getting so long, I am starting a new one. Of course if you prefer this thread that's fine too.

Trump’s son in law defaulted on a big mortgage for a commercial property in Manhattan.
That’s where the Trump family shows leadership, running out on their debts. And criticizing socialism which is actually for the rich; rugged individualism for the rest of us.

https://www.bisnow.com/new-york/news/capital-markets/kushner-companies-mortgage-103550

Link to new thread.
https://streeteasy.com/talk/discussion/45630-are-we-having-fun-yet-corona

Thanks 300.