COVID-19

[Dream of Freedom]

If anyone is interested in when their state plans on reopening CNBC has a state by state breakdown. Looks like we're getting dine-in restaurants back Monday.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/30/coronav ... esses.html

[Riggerjack]

@ ZAF,

Thank you.

Here's what I am trying to say.

The health outcome of C19 is going to be horrible in some places, and nearly non existent in others. I say that because it is already horrible in some places, and I hope that others will be spared.

Given that range of potential outcomes, what is the right public policy?

The economic outcomes of public policy is going to be horrible in some places, and not nearly as bad in others. Given the range of potential outcomes, what is the right policy?

There is no universal right answer. Whatever is best in one circumstance is disastrous in another.

The proper answer is to work on a more local set of information. The more local, the more relevant. The right thing for me to be doing in Snohomish county wa, is not the right thing for me to be doing in NYC, or rural Utah.

At an emotional level, many people are arguing about what "we should do" as though "we" are in the same place, facing the same circumstances. To me, this seems like the behavior of people trained to get in line, wait their turn, and soon, they will get their juice and cookies.

We all went through the training. Some of us are trying to pretend that what has worked, will work again. It's the wrong approach to the situation.

That we believe we can balance one interest against another, when the range, variability and effects are so disparate seems to be habit, not reason.

[Freedom_2018]

Spot on....

https://twitter.com/billmaher/status/12 ... 1960003585

Like the court jesters of yore.... comedians tell the best truths.

George Carlin should have been around.

[7Wannabe5]

@jacob:

The fat tail of the new status quo. I agree.

@Augustus:

The median per capita income in the U.S. is greater than $28,000. The average per capita income in the U.S. is quite a bit higher than that due to oligarchy. Jacob lives on less than 25% of the median per capita income in the U.S. in order to do his part in reducing consumption = global climate change.

I agree that if the average African whose average per capita income is well below the global middle class safety line (which is currently $11/day per capita consumption= approximately 1/2 Jacob) were to suffer 75% consumption reduction that would be tragic. Americans learning, even very quickly, to live on $7000 per capita per year would not be a tragedy in my book because it very well might have the secondary effect of saving the planet from frying.

[Jason]

The proper answer is to work on a more local set of information. The more local, the more relevant. The right thing for me to be doing in Snohomish county wa, is not the right thing for me to be doing in NYC, or rural Utah.

As best as I understand it, this is the most defensible method, Constitutionally speaking. The federal government was correct in deferring to states, and by extension, states defer to local municipalities. Federal government assists in proportion to local needs. That is Federalism in action. This is why war analogies when applied to domestic policies fall short in certain aspects i.e. just because we live in a Democracy, does not mean the internal threat the country faces threatens in a democratic fashion.

[Riggerjack]

@ Jason

But just because the house is in disarray doesn't mean the foundation is faulty.

The foundation has always been faulty.

We live in a society where people argue that our justice system is racist.

Against people who argue that studies show that prosecutions for crimes match up with the descriptions of criminals, where race could be identified.

And then a third party will chime in with crime overall is down across the board, and life is safer than ever before. Experts disagree on the why... Probably something to do with lead paint...

That's the fine work of people arguing public policy, and the social contract.


All the while, ignoring the fact that 96% of federal inmates got there by plea bargain. That if you belong to the wrong demographic, accusation of a crime is effectively conviction. Fighting the accusation will lead to highly disproportionate punishment.

Ignoring the fact that the safer world is bought by wholesale locking up of certain demographics, and then removing the crimes they commit against each other from the studies.

Then running a catch and release policy through certain demographics which seems to maximize the local damage.

What part of the social contract is that in, again?

Our society is based on asymptomatic sacrifice. It always has been. Today is only different, in that different demographics are being sacrificed.

[7Wannabe5]

@Augustus:

Where did I say that I wanted to live like an average African? I definitely do not. It is my goal to live on less than $7000 per year or equivalent in actual total energy consumption flow. Right now I am more like $9600. However, I have been pretty consistent at approximately that level for many years/decades inclusive of child rearing years.

[Freedom_2018]

Maybe I am outing myself as a despicable consumer, but my goal in life is not to live on a very small expense amount so that I can save the planet or some other grand notion (if anything I am more worried about saving myself from the planet which has shown many times through history that it can and will do what it wants ....as George Carlin said ' the planet is not fucked, we are' ).

Now I surely don't want to cause excess waste or harm to others but if someone tried to tell me that I should not travel across the country or spend extended time overseas (even though I try to do that most $ efficiently ) because of Carbon footprint or whatever and that sitting at home and just reading books (however insightful and wonderful they might be...but still are a derivative of someone else's experience) and posting on the internet while growing some carbon sequestering vegetation is what I am limited to or is in support of a noble cause ...I would tell them where on my body they could kiss me

I am not pursuing ERE to improve the planet (it might be an unintended and nice side effect) but to be able to pursue my hopes and dreams in the smartest and most effective way possible.

[7Wannabe5]

@Freedom_2018:

I would hope that most members of this forum would be creative enough to come up with their own very unique mix of 1 Jacob per year consumption. More power to you if you want to spend $2000/year on jet fuel and $1000 on grass fed steak and $800 at the racetrack. I’m not about judgment. However, I would note that 21st century global travel is likely more derivative of other people’s experiences than deeply exploring your own backyard and local library.

[Riggerjack]

I worded my last post poorly.

The point I was trying to make is that in debate mode, we tend to look at the problem from our own perspective, then voice that perspective. We can then compare/contrast and get a feel for the overton window, and where our own viewpoint is on that spectrum.

It's the same process that forms the WEIRD bias of University studies.

But C19 has us balancing competing interests, both on very fast expotential curves, with delays in indicators and counterintuitive effects.

If someone gets this economic/pathogen balance"right" (minimizing damage to both) it will be an accident. Worse, it won't be a reproducible accident, as even the same place will never again have the same economy or pathogen.

This won't stop administrators from targeting it when preparing for the next outbreak.

There is no good policy at scale for C19. And that's what I was trying to say. Scale, which is our natural progressive path to a solution, works against us in this case. Decisions should be made at a very local level, with as much information as possible.

But there is no way a political crisis can be worked that way. It is foreign to our normative hierarchical approach to policy. It's foreign to our "adjust a bit, remeasure, adjust a bit more" version of policy debate. Decisions have to be made on guesses, and adjusted on guesses. There simply isn't time for better, with fast curves and lagging indicators like these.

Our intuitions are wrong here. Not merely nonproductive, but actually counterproductive.

[steveo73]

I would hope that most members of this forum would be creative enough to come up with their own very unique mix of 1 Jacob per year consumption. More power to you if you want to spend $2000/year on jet fuel and $1000 on grass fed steak and $800 at the racetrack. I’m not about judgment.

So long as everyone is under 1 Jacob per year. Sorry but I don't buy that everyone has to reduce their consumption at all. Why does everyone have to consume less ? Is it for the benefit of the world ?

I understand reducing consumption in order to make your life easier and therefore more happier. I also understand that there needs to be societal actions for the benefit of society. I also think expecting everyone to only use x amount of resources because you (or anyone) has decided that is the correct amount to use is shows a complete lack of recognition of how poorly human beings judge calculations like that.

I remember 20 + years ago learning about the global oil crisis and how we are doomed. Oil dropped below $0 recently because there is so bloody much of it.

However, I would note that 21st century global travel is likely more derivative of other people’s experiences than deeply exploring your own backyard and local library.

I think 21st century global travel is significantly less interesting than reading books to some of us but each to his own.

[George the original one]

Why would the CDC be so low?

Read the footnotes. It takes up to 8 weeks before CDC has the data from the states. 8 weeks is a long time during COVID.

[slsdly]

The debates on environmental obligations remind me of the BSD vs GPL licenses in the software world. The BSD license was a very simple license -- you just have to retain the license notice when distributing. The code was otherwise provided as is, and you can do what you want with it, including changing it without distributing your modifications. Many argue this is the most free as in freedom license.

The GPL on the other hand requires you redistribute the software under the same terms in which you received it, including any modifications you make, and allowing any patents you own that may cover it to be used royalty free. The GPL trades off the freedom for the present distributors, in order to preserve the freedom for all those in the future to do what those in the past were able to do.

It feels like those of us relatively well off have a nigh infinite amount of choices we can make in the world. Some of those, such as travelling and eating lots of beef and dairy, have broader implications for future humans. Most people take the BSD road, and tell themselves/us, "I'll do what I want with what I am given."

As a GPL sympathizer, I think it is tragic. Barring some miracle, people in the future will have far less freedom because of how we are choosing to exercise our freedom today. I don't have children, mostly because I have no interest in being a father, probably be quite bad at it. If I had to attribute a small portion to the environment, it would be because I don't see a bright future for humanity -- I think those who claim it is to minimize their footprint are foolish (typically that is used to justify doing whatever they want). But I do have family and friends with children, and if nothing else, I'd like to make at least a token effort. But honestly, this is mostly post rationalization -- ERE didn't dramatically change how I lived, although the details have been refined over the years.

As for being sad and pathetic, because simply I find travel (and frankly, most travellers themselves) borish and keep my meat consumption to family events and the odd restaurant, rest assured, I feel likewise. I have plenty of hobbies besides reading books and arguing with internet strangers, albeit with COVID, perhaps some have been a bit curtailed .

To fully bring it back to COVID, I sympathesize with Ego's point that perhaps we have gone too far. What the GPL should prevent you from do in an ideal world would be minimal. Perhaps we should have re-evaluated the risks, as the data started coming in about who is dying and who is not, and done extreme measures to protect them and only them. I am not upset about the choices that have been made though -- it was no doubt difficult. I don't think governments around the world were eager to wreck their economies, and they feared body bags on every street corner more.

[7Wannabe5]

@steve73:

My note was not meant as judgment. Just best mathematical model I know of combined with Jacob’s (originator if ERE) clearly oft stated take on the related ethics. If you have faith in a model based on “innovation” then even if your ethical take is similar to Jacob’s your spending allowance towards sustainable earth system might be a good deal greater. I guess what I am trying to communicate is that what I have low tolerance for is inconsistency. I spend more than $7000/year because I am weak and am not always able to do what I think is the right thing to do. I feel guilty sometimes when I think about 6 year old children in Bangladesh drowning because I am dumping downstream to the future.

I wish I could believe in innovation, but I have done a good deal of research and as far as I can tell nobody has even defined the term in a manner that is not self-referential, so I do not include it in my systems models except in the form of cloud of unknown beyond boundaries.

[George the original one]

I'm worried civilization won't adapt to shutting off 70% of gdp overnight.

You keep using 70% GDP. How do you get that figure when, say, the UK is under a similar lockdown and their calculation is a loss of 30% GDP?

[George the original one]

Reality Checks

Pretend tonight's USA COVID-19 death tally of 66,368 is correct. Then, if "this is just the flu" with a 0.1% death rate, 19.5% of Americans have been exposed and it will take another 6-7 months to reach 60%-70% infections and possibly herd immunity at the rate we're currently going. Total deaths will be over 200,000.

Or, if you're in camp of the death rate is closer to 1.0%, then only 2.0% of Americans have been exposed and it will take another 5-6 years to reach possible herd immunity at the rate we're currently going. Total deaths will be over 2,000,000.

[Ego]

Reality Checks

Pretend tonight's USA COVID-19 death tally of 66,368 is correct. Then, if "this is just the flu" with a 0.1% death rate, 19.5% of Americans have been exposed and it will take another 6-7 months to reach 60%-70% infections and possibly herd immunity at the rate we're currently going. Total deaths will be over 200,000.

Exactly! So we agree! Lock down the vulnerable. Get everyone else out and spread the infection faster so we can reopen for all because otherwise it will take forever if we keep the lockdown in place.

You are proving Dr. Katz's point, "If all we do is flatten the curve, you don't prevent deaths, you just change the dates."

[Jin+Guice]

@Augustus: Are you doing alright man? You seem like you're kind of freaking out. You're in a rough spot, I would probably be freaking out.

@GTOO: I ran the same calculations a few days ago and I was like "fuck!!!!!" Also, the difference in death rates across areas just doesn't make sense to me, unless density is super important and R0 is effectively lowered in low density areas. I think this is the single best argument against the idea that a large portion of the population has been exposed. I still stand by my current position that lockdown should be lifted for most of the U.S.A., because we are clearly not trying to eliminate the virus and hospital overrun has been avoided for now. I still think death rates are closer to 1% with an intact hospital system. Regardless, I think there is going to be a really bad second wave, though Sweden provides a small ray of hope.

@Everyone: I've been holding my tongue, but some of these economic arguments are sort of anti-ERE, IMO. I thought we all agreed that reducing consumption was a good thing? Essential services are still open... I'm not saying you're not doing ERE if you are worried about the economic ramifications of this or that you are a bad EREer if the crisis is personally affecting your economic situation. This crisis will force a lot of people to reevaluate the feasibility of their financial and economic resilience, which I thought was sort of the point of ERE?

I've been thinking recently about something from the book. I'm too lazy to find the exact quote but the essence is "we've got four times more wealth than our grandparents but fail to live four times better lives. It's like our grandparents had 1 ice creme cone and we've got 4, but we dropped one on the ground, through one in the trash and let the other one melt in the car." 3 ice creme cones is a lot of buffer.

Also, the economy seems like it might be doing o.k.? I know a lot of indicators look bad, but a lot of indicators made it looks like the virus was worse than it is too. Both things are going better than I thought they would be. On March 15th I thought we would be seeing literal bodies in the street by April 15th. I also thought there would be rent riots by May 1st. The virus and the economy both have the potential to get a lot worse, but both are not as bad as original worse case scenarios indicated they would be.

Thanks to this community and Jacob in particular for making it so I don't have to worry about my personal financial situation during this crisis.

[Freedom_2018]

@Freedom_2018:

However, I would note that 21st century global travel is likely more derivative of other people’s experiences than deeply exploring your own backyard and local library.

To some extent everything is derived from some precedent...but there is a lot of room for customisation and innovating on what exists....I think we ENTPs tend to be rather good at it.

Also one can do both...dig wide and dig deep though I submit a single minded pursuit will go further in a particular direction. In fact I think doing both is preferable for most people if the objective is to draw a wide multifaceted understanding of the world we live in. Reading widely is invaluable in providing us with a perspective wider than we could hope to achieve on our own ...however I like to mix it up with my own personal experience and oftentimes experience of one enriches the other I find.

+1 for Libraries. Despite not having a permanent physical address I have membership to over 6 libraries across the country. Seattle Library has one of the best ebooks collection.

[ZAFCorrection]

@Jin+Guice

ERE is systems thinking applied to personal strategy. I believe Jacob developed it under the condition of being skeptical of the effectiveness of government policy towards addressing climate change. Thus, I don't believe the stated policy opinions are anti-ERE so much as non-existent within an ERE framework.

I would think an ERE guy would be a little more concerned about, or at least aware of, the potential for unexpected higher-order effects of certain choices (e.g. tiki torches and pitchforks on a large scale). But I think everyone's having fun winning the current game. Down the road I expect the possibility that a few people might wish to trade their ERE master race pedestal for policy decisions which didn't force everyone into hard mode.