Objectively intelligent.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

I'm not sure what your problem is. You posted an article. When people do that, it's usually because they think other people should read it. I started to read it. The first paragraph made claims about the virus's mortality rate that are disproved by the numbers of people dying in New York City. That's not a straw man, and it's not sophistry. It's middle-school math.

No. We settled that by me admitting the Stanford study had some inaccuracies and then explaining why the 10X NYC death rate you suggested was possible was actually impossible. We agreed we were both working with somewhat inaccurate information.

Your straw man emerged later, where you lumped me in with Less. I never said I favored ending social distancing, or "letting it rip" as you described Less's approach. I actually disagreed with Less and supported your point about continuing to wear masks.

You piss me when you start bullshitting about how the disease isn't all that deadly and how we need to open back up ("carefully!") to save the economy.

You piss me off when you ignore the economic disaster we're going to see if this thing goes for 45 more days without some incremental reopening.

We have PPP, plus reserves. I could sit back and wait this out from a "nice... I'll get to pick the bones of those who can't survive" perspective, like a lot of assholes I know in P/E and finance generally. I'm arguing against doing so, and I'm arguing because I see a wave of human carnage coming on the economic side.

You ignore that. You refuse to deal with that except for your one decent argument - that opening too soon and seeing a huge spike will do more damage to the economy than we can imagine. I agree we have that risk. That's why I have repeatedly argued for a careful, incremental, and reversible reopening - sticking toes in the water and slowly easing into a new normal where we're all incredibly diligent about hygiene and distancing.

But you don't like that. You want the false argument of "Science v. Business." That's why you refuse to acknowledge that I am not on the same page as Less.

I am seeking to walk a middle ground. Your response, which is slippery, seems to be: We cannot open anything until we have adequate testing. Am I getting that wrong? Please advise. If I'm correct, please read the following:

WE CANNOT AFFORD THAT. YOU WILL SEE WIDESPREAD SOCIAL UNREST AND DISOBEDIENCE OF ORDER - A TRUE UNRAVELING - IF WE WAIT THAT LONG.

(Yes, it's come to that - you must be compelled to deal with reality by people resorting to all caps.)

My wife goes off to hospital every day to save people's lives who are dying from this disease that is not the like the flu she sees every year. If we open the economy back up and the hospitals get overwhelmed, healthcare workers (among others) will pay the price.

What do you not understand about these words:

Careful
Incremental
Reversible

Medical professionals are the most important resource we have right now. What kind of sane cost/benefit analysis would devalue them?

I don't need a lecture from you about the economic costs of what we're going through. Our business is down 95% from a few months ago and we have laid a bunch of people off. I totally get it.

Oh yes you do. I'm like the guy who guides people over the River Styx. I get the desperate calls. I see the businesses wrecked because one can only work out a loan if there's some revenue, and where there isn't one can only help ease his client into financial collapse.

And I am seriously scared that if we allow people to make medicine the enemy of economics here, I'm going to be insanely busy. And insanely unhappy. I'd rather rescue people than play Charon.

You've said a whole bunch of other things, and it gets hard to figure what point you're making, so I stopped responding to that thread. But if you're calling me an oracle because two months ago I said this was going to be a shitstorm when you were saying it was like the flu, thanks -- I appreciate the props.

I called you an oracle because you and people like Gates are predicting the future with inadequate information. We know that social distancing has flattened the curve, and we know that people have learned the lessons of what they need to do to practice it well. You assume, without any information to support you, that efforts to carefully reopen incorporating social distancing and PPE for HC workers, will fail. You're either an oracle or a man whose powers of rational thought are corrupted by fear.

If we see a spike, we can quickly reverse course or pare the easing of lockdown restrictions. We can walk a middle ground. People like you are offering nothing but, "No! We mustn't!" Thankfully, your views are rejected by the general public and policy makers.