The flipside is that the USA could recover from this in a few months, whilst the rest of the world is still at the start of their 18-month lockdowns.
It is grim, but a reduced elderly and sick population would save significant amounts of federal and state money.
I'm going through Coronavirus right now personally (I'm in Europe), with the typical symptoms for a young healthy person: dry eyes, tightness around the sternum, sweats, light fatigue. Its really no different from any other cold I've had. Without all the news about it I probably wouldn't even notice.
It would be politically difficult, but allowing COVID-19 to take effect, with some mitigation (eg. recommending isolation for the elderly), would lead to long-term strategic benefits for the countries that can get through it.
It would be like post-WW2 all over again - the USA being the only functional industrial economy. Tourism from around the world could be welcomed due to the population's herd immunity, and a baby boom would probably result from the cheap housing made available to young people.
By my estimate, we would need to shutdown 10 years worth of life in order to save 1 year of life from Coronavirus.
And those shutdown years are in the peak working years, whereas the years saved are in the twilight years.
The suppression strategy is hugely economically destructive. We should not accept it. Politicians need to isolate the elderly and prepare the public to accept hundreds of thousands of deaths within the elderly population - ie. doing their job and making hard decisions for the good of us all, instead of just pushing all of the cost to businesses and individuals.
Korea will have to remain on alert, forever, as their population has no established immunity. A vaciine may never come - there is no influenza vaccine (it mutates every season).
Plus, there are grim, yet economic, benefits if the sickest and most elderly die from Coronavirus, in the form of long-term savings on pensions and healthcare. This should be taken into account in strategic national planning.
The UK approach seems the most sensible - keep the economy and society functioning, and recommend that the most vulnerable practice self-isolation. Better to isolate those who are not participating in the productive economy (ie. the sick and elderly) than the entirety of the population.
And if the worst case occurs, with millions of elderly and immunocompromised dying, there are billions in potential savings in pensions and old-age healthcare, as well as improvements in housing affordability and overall reductions in national CO2 emissions.
Agreed, we need to just push onwards and all will be back to normal in 12 months.
The facts remain that children, young adults, adults and even elderly without comorbidities will survive. Deaths are still restricted to those with existing health problems, particularly the elderly.
From an economic perspective, this is the perfect pandemic. We should maintain all schooling and social activities to spread the virus as far and rapidly as possible, to gain herd immunity as quickly as possible. The vulnerable can self-isolate.
The savings in pensions and long-term healthcare for the elderly, as well as a reduction in housing prices owing to the deceased estates, will promote an economic boom that may even - in the long term - offset the short terms costs we are facing right now.
You can imagine a situation where the USA has survived the virus and gained mass immunity, with 5% of its elderly population perishing along the way, giving the USA a long-term advantage due to lower payroll taxes, versus Europe who shut down early, have continual flareups due to lack of herd immunity, and continue with a heavy taxation burden due to elderly losses of only 0.5%.
The big advantage could be finally moving the PSU out of the case, and having it as just an external power brick. This will make systems significantly lighter and smaller (and thus more portable), take heat out of the case, and improve airflow.
You can already buy 330w laptop chargers - just beef them up and you could easily run a mid-grade gaming PC.
"A Single Death is a Tragedy; a Million Deaths is a Statistic"
In many Western societies, the elderly are going to receive more in lifetime services than they ever 'put in' in taxes.
Additionally, the wealth of the oldest cohorts have been increasing, whilst the youngest cohorts have been decreasing.
If a 2% deathrate across my country (overwhelmingly the elderly) means I can finally afford to buy a house (due to lower taxes, and increased housing supply/reduced demand), that's a situation I am willing to accept. It would be beneficial to society because I would be able to have children and improve the currently very low fertility rate.
Additionally, the youngest generations now face a huge burden of solving climate change, something that older generations have been responsible for but politically refuse to address.
When I look at Coronavirus, I see only opportunity for civilization and an improvement in the personal situations for many young people.
If there is any 'plus' to this situation, its that Coronavirus will rapidly de-age many Western countries. This could lead to large economic benefits in the form of long-term savings on pensions and healthcare, as well as freeing up housing for families.
My biggest concern about CO2 is the cognitive impact it has on humans - at levels 800ppm and higher, mental performance is impacted. It will take a while for the atmosphere to reach this level (hopefully it never does), but it is common inside houses and offices. As atmospheric CO2 rises, it becomes more difficult to ventilate buildings, and human mental performance degrades.
In terms of geoengineering, it seems like these two are our best bets:
In any case it seems absolutely bonkers that we are still selling fossil-fueled-vehicles and building coal power plants when we clearly have the technology and capability to replace both of them.
The annual death rate in the USA is 2.8m. The virus will spread throughout the biosphere and become a standard part of the human virus paradigm, like the common cold or flu.
The best than can be done is to manage and stage its extent as much as possible, to avoid overwhelming healthcare services all at once. The Japanese seem to have the same idea.
Cases should be triaged and medical resources dedicated to those aged 50 and lower, who are still working and in generally good health.
The US pension system across many states, companies, and the federal Government itself is unsustainable, so this virus may be the key to bring those programs back into proper operation. Cities like Chicago will face a huge relief as Coronavirus spreads and lessens their pension burden.
Additionally, the housing freed up could be used by younger people and families, dramatically improving the quality of life for much of society. Inheritances could be used by younger generations to invest in businesses or upgrade personal living situations.
Lower pension and healthcare expenditure will allow lower taxes, perhaps allowing the elimination of payroll taxes.
The deaths will be tragic but from a purely economic perspective Coronavirus looks like a major opportunity for Western societies to de-age. We are very lucky that unlike other Pandemics, this virus is restricted to the sick and elderly, and barely impacts the young and healthy, unlike say the Spanish Flu.
The 2% figure is misleading, mortality is overwhelmingly restricted to the elderly and particularly those with existing health problems:
PRE-EXISTING CONDITION DEATH RATE*
Cardiovascular disease 10.5%
Diabetes 7.3%
Chronic respiratory disease 6.3%
Hypertension 6.0%
Cancer 5.6%
no pre-existing conditions 0.9%
AGE DEATH RATE*
80+ years old 14.8%
70-79 years old 8.0%
60-69 years old 3.6%
50-59 years old 1.3%
40-49 years old 0.4%
30-39 years old 0.2%
20-29 years old 0.2%
10-19 years old 0.2%
0-9 years old no fatalities
Shutting down the economy and quarantining whole areas will do more harm than the virus. Tens of thousands of Americans already die of the flu and Coronavirus us just a very virulent form of that.
I realise that its grim to talk about, but there may actually be economic benefits from the very sickest dying from the virus and thus relieving the burden of large pension and healthcare expenses.
It is grim, but a reduced elderly and sick population would save significant amounts of federal and state money.
I'm going through Coronavirus right now personally (I'm in Europe), with the typical symptoms for a young healthy person: dry eyes, tightness around the sternum, sweats, light fatigue. Its really no different from any other cold I've had. Without all the news about it I probably wouldn't even notice.
It would be politically difficult, but allowing COVID-19 to take effect, with some mitigation (eg. recommending isolation for the elderly), would lead to long-term strategic benefits for the countries that can get through it.
It would be like post-WW2 all over again - the USA being the only functional industrial economy. Tourism from around the world could be welcomed due to the population's herd immunity, and a baby boom would probably result from the cheap housing made available to young people.