Vaccine

watfly said:
The virus and its variants are unpredictable, true. But those that are vulnerable and the outcomes of infection are very predictable. Our policies shouldn't revolve around the unpredictability of the virus, but revolve around those that are vulnerable to the virus.
Click to expand...

For the immediate short term I largely agree with you. I'll leave policy to others; there is no shortage of perspectives. I'm just glad I don't have to make those calls. Going forward, I hope your confidence in the predictability of who is and is not vulnerable remains well founded. The virus is evolving-amazing rapidly-and its virulence profile is under neither positive nor negative selection. The one perspective I will represent is that our kids will almost certainly be dealing with re-emergent features of this pandemic throughout their lifetimes. It's possible that we really should be calling omicron Cov-3.
 
I guess it's official now (sort of). Justice Gorsuch says SCOTUS discussion that flu causes hundreds of thousands of deaths every year.

CDC records --

www.cdc.gov

Burden of Influenza

Learn about how CDC estimates the burden of seasonal influenza in the U.S.
www.cdc.gov www.cdc.gov
 
dad4 said:
I have no doubt that you will continue to party like it’s 1999. Most of Phoenix will be like you. Other areas will mask up during covid/flu season and have less covid and flu.
Click to expand...


And there it is....the quiet part said out loud....what you've been accused of but have dodged: that you would like the new normal to be perpetual masking during covid/flu season. No thanks.
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
For the immediate short term I largely agree with you. I'll leave policy to others; there is no shortage of perspectives. I'm just glad I don't have to make those calls. Going forward, I hope your confidence in the predictability of who is and is not vulnerable remains well founded. The virus is evolving-amazing rapidly-and its virulence profile is under neither positive nor negative selection. The one perspective I will represent is that our kids will almost certainly be dealing with re-emergent features of this pandemic throughout their lifetimes. It's possible that we really should be calling omicron Cov-3.
Click to expand...
I won't say I'm confident, but we should make decisions based on the best available data we have and not based upon speculation of a potential long term risk. When you do make decisions on potential long term risk, you often do so at the expense of actual long term negative impacts (ie like closing in-person education.)
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
For the immediate short term I largely agree with you. I'll leave policy to others; there is no shortage of perspectives. I'm just glad I don't have to make those calls. Going forward, I hope your confidence in the predictability of who is and is not vulnerable remains well founded. The virus is evolving-amazing rapidly-and its virulence profile is under neither positive nor negative selection. The one perspective I will represent is that our kids will almost certainly be dealing with re-emergent features of this pandemic throughout their lifetimes. It's possible that we really should be calling omicron Cov-3.
Click to expand...

There are other coronaviruses. My friend caught Covid delta, Covid41 and covid omicron all in one year. One of the things that made this so deadly (like smallpox with the Inca, measles with the Hawaiians) was that it was novel. This isn't unique in that respect. Children die of flu and RSV each year (both of which are deadlier to them). It's possible this mutates somewhere down the road into something far deadlier and everything has to lock down again, but then that's true of flu, the other coronaviruses, the enteroviruses, adenoviruses and RSV. It's the human condition.

The thing that still has me mouth agape was the absolute hubris of some people, including many in the scientific and medical communities. As if we had evolved to a point that these pesky viruses that have plagued our ancestors for millenia no longer should be of concern to us, because we had evolved to the point our technology could control or "shut down" the virus. While we've made rapid advancements and even developed a vaccine in record time, the human species now has egg on its face for its hubris.
 
Californians fleeing for Texas so fast U-Haul runs out of trucks for them: report
California and Illinois saw the largest net-loss of U-Haul trucks

The Texas economy is growing fast," stated Kristina Ramos, U-Haul Company of South Austin president. "With a strong job market and low cost of living, it’s a no-brainer. Texas doesn’t have an income tax, so families get more for their money."

www.foxbusiness.com

Californians fleeing for Texas so fast U-Haul runs out of trucks for them: report

Texas took top spot on the list after briefly falling to second to Florida in 2019 and Tennessee in 2020.
www.foxbusiness.com www.foxbusiness.com

1641587293476.png
 
espola said:
Playing around with word games is just politics.
Click to expand...
That's funny. And the vaccines were never marketed as transmission blockers and immunity providers. You are a master of revionsist history.

Typical pharma play book. There is a reason why we are only 1 of 2 countries in the world that allow pharmaceuticals to be advertised. And to allow them to market EUA drugs is shameful. Certainy is profitable though.

I'll stand by for your nonansweranswer
 
Grace T. said:
The economics of this are incredibly complicated. You can’t just compare average wages since this like col and taxes come into play. The question is to what extent do union shop wages (the us doesn’t allow true closed shops) capture through bargaining more money which would otherwise be left on the table without adverse consequences (such as a decrease in supply of jobs which would be dictated by the supply curve). It’s complicated and there’s not a whole lot of consensus v an open shop (though definitely some against a non union shop). It’s whatever this capture is which is the benefit v the cost of forcing people to choose or lose their jobs that you’d analyze (because as we’ve established in this thread the c/b is everything). One thing to note is this analysis only works for a private employer where there is competition in the market. Otherwise it goes to the heart of the matter where we started this discussion: teachers unions trying to close schools (which is not a wage issue) and people having to join a union which stance they disagree with.
Click to expand...
Only lawyers make things complicated.
 
espola said:
I guess it's official now (sort of). Justice Gorsuch says SCOTUS discussion that flu causes hundreds of thousands of deaths every year.

CDC records --

www.cdc.gov

Burden of Influenza

Learn about how CDC estimates the burden of seasonal influenza in the U.S.
www.cdc.gov www.cdc.gov
Click to expand...

www.medicinenet.com

Flu Kills 646,000 People Worldwide Each Year: Study

Seasonal flu kills 291,000 to 646,000 people worldwide each year, according to a new estimate that's higher than the previous one of 250,000 to 500,000 deaths a year.
www.medicinenet.com www.medicinenet.com
 
dad4 said:
Which prevailing wage? Mean, median, or mode?

Yes, some states actually use mode.
Click to expand...

Meh...most economics believe the union wage premium exists. It's anywhere from 3-20% and dependent on industry (one example: public school v. private school teacher wages based on years of experience). Closed shops are able to extract more (by exercising monopoly power) than union shops than open shops than non union shops. It's large in the public sector than the private because of regulatory capture. You can't avoid the supply curve, though, and the premium has to be made up elsewhere (....it must come from somewhere....if you take it from the capitalist overlords, which means lower profits which means lower investments in said industry). The union wage premium, though, has dropped for a lot of industries subject to non-union international competition....in said cases the unions just wind up pricing themselves out in the US to lower cost overseas firms. It's one of the theories for why unions have declined in goods creation industries, but are robust in services and public sector industries. TANSTAAFL and there are costs for every intervention a government makes.
 
Grace T. said:
Meh...most economics believe the union wage premium exists. It's anywhere from 3-20% and dependent on industry (one example: public school v. private school teacher wages based on years of experience). Closed shops are able to extract more (by exercising monopoly power) than union shops than open shops than non union shops. It's large in the public sector than the private because of regulatory capture. You can't avoid the supply curve, though, and the premium has to be made up elsewhere (....it must come from somewhere....if you take it from the capitalist overlords, which means lower profits which means lower investments in said industry). The union wage premium, though, has dropped for a lot of industries subject to non-union international competition....in said cases the unions just wind up pricing themselves out in the US to lower cost overseas firms. It's one of the theories for why unions have declined in goods creation industries, but are robust in services and public sector industries. TANSTAAFL and there are costs for every intervention a government makes.
Click to expand...
When I was affordable housing business, prevailing wage added about 15-20% to the total cost. This was 17 years ago, so I don't know how accurate it is now. Prevailing wage became required for any projects we used public funding, which wasn't conducive to actually building affordable housing. Hence why we moved on from the industry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top