Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Political Forum
test
The Political Forum Discuss anything related to politics in this forum. World politics, US Politics, State and Local.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 646
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 396
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 278
George Spelvin 265
sharkman29 255
Top Posters
DallasRain70793
biomed163231
Yssup Rider60924
gman4453294
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48646
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42577
CryptKicker37215
The_Waco_Kid36997
Mokoa36496
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-29-2020, 10:22 AM   #1
Tiny
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Mar 4, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 8,893
Encounters: 2
Default How many people will die in the USA from the new coronavirus by December 31, 2021??

Participate in the poll or better yet give us a number. My number is 260,000. That's from assuming a 20% infection rate and 0.4% mortality rate of people infected:

327,000,000 people x 0.2 infection rate x .004 mortality rate = 260,000 deaths

You've got experts in epidemiology and public health predicting everything between 10,000 and 1.5 million deaths, so none of us nimrods is going to blow a hole in whatever estimate you throw out.
Tiny is online now   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 10:28 AM   #2
Tiny
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Mar 4, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 8,893
Encounters: 2
Default

Looks like there's a problem with the web site today, so I wasn't able to make this thread a poll. But if you'd like to post an estimate please do so. I'll be damn sure to revive the thread on January 1, 2022 if my number was the closest, and may do so anyway.
Tiny is online now   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 10:30 AM   #3
HedonistForever
Valued Poster
 
HedonistForever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 31, 2019
Location: Miami, Fl
Posts: 5,667
Default

A little to ghoulish for my taste.


But if people are still dying by Dec 2020 much less 2021, were done as a functioning economy and maybe even the human race if 2021 but I have all the faith in the world that we will have a medical treatment comparable to influenza before winter of 2020.
HedonistForever is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 10:35 AM   #4
Jacuzzme
Premium Access
 
Jacuzzme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 16, 2016
Location: Steel City
Posts: 7,892
Encounters: 43
Default

Less than the democrats are hoping for.
Jacuzzme is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 10:36 AM   #5
Tiny
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Mar 4, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 8,893
Encounters: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HedonistForever View Post
A little to ghoulish for my taste.
Yes, especially considering one or more of us may be gone by then because of this. It's an important question though. A related question, that's more important and more ghoulish, how many people are you going to save with a severe lockdown and what's the incremental cost to do it? Say you save 150,000 lives, and the permanent cost to the economy to do that is $1.5 trillion. You've lost $10 million per person, which perhaps wasn't worth it considering the average age of the person you saved. Given the uncertainties in how many people will die, how many lives you could save given different scenarios, and how much they would cost, this might be a fools game.
Tiny is online now   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 10:44 AM   #6
HedonistForever
Valued Poster
 
HedonistForever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 31, 2019
Location: Miami, Fl
Posts: 5,667
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiny View Post
Yes, especially considering one or more of us may be gone by then because of this. It's an important question though. A related question, that's more important and more ghoulish, how many people are you going to save with a severe lockdown and what's the incremental cost to do it? Say you save 150,000 lives, and the permanent cost to the economy to do that is $1.5 trillion. You've lost $10 million per person, which perhaps wasn't worth it considering the average age of the person you saved. Given the uncertainties in how many people will die, how many lives you could save given different scenarios, and how much they would cost, this might be a fools game.

And in my opinion, there seem to be more people saying they don't care what the economic cost is, only the cost of lives is what matters. We'll see if that changes should shades of 1929 comes upon us.


I was locked out of editing my first post. This is what I tried to add but couldn't get back in till now.


But if people are still dying by Dec 2020 much less 2021, were done as a functioning economy and maybe even the human race if 2021 but I have all the faith in the world that we will have a medical treatment comparable to influenza before winter of 2020.
HedonistForever is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 11:35 AM   #7
friendly fred
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 27, 2018
Location: Back in Texas!
Posts: 7,196
Encounters: 5
Default

I'm going to say that 50,000 die, more or less the equivalent of 5 to 10 metropolises the size of NYC, times it's death rate, plus an equal number of cases spread out throughout the rest of the country.

I also estimate that if Trump hadn't shut off travel from China early, that number would be much worse.
friendly fred is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 11:48 AM   #8
Levianon17
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 4, 2019
Location: In the valley
Posts: 10,786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiny View Post
Yes, especially considering one or more of us may be gone by then because of this. It's an important question though. A related question, that's more important and more ghoulish, how many people are you going to save with a severe lockdown and what's the incremental cost to do it? Say you save 150,000 lives, and the permanent cost to the economy to do that is $1.5 trillion. You've lost $10 million per person, which perhaps wasn't worth it considering the average age of the person you saved. Given the uncertainties in how many people will die, how many lives you could save given different scenarios, and how much they would cost, this might be a fools game.
With that being said. you might want to ask, what's the real agenda?
Levianon17 is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 11:53 AM   #9
adav8s28
Valued Poster
 
adav8s28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 4, 2011
Location: sacremento
Posts: 3,586
Encounters: 1
Default

Assuming social distancing is not practiced for the rest of the year.

327,000,000 people x 0.4 infection rate x .012 mortality rate = 1,569,600 deaths
adav8s28 is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 12:55 PM   #10
HoeHummer
BANNED
 
HoeHummer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 7, 2019
Location: North
Posts: 3,942
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacuzzme View Post
Less than the democrats are hoping for.
Dumbass

HoeHummer is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 01:27 PM   #11
oeb11
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: dallas
Posts: 23,345
Default

it is my hope and prayer that all the DPST's practice stringent social distancing for the forseeable future.

The restraint will decrease their population additions - and strengthen the gene pool of humanity!
oeb11 is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 01:40 PM   #12
Tiny
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Mar 4, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 8,893
Encounters: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Levianon17 View Post
With that being said. you might want to ask, what's the real agenda?
To be clear, by fools game I meant that it may be impossible to come up with a good estimate of what dollar value we're putting on a life for any given policy or plan of action. Clearly, in New York City where the health system is severely stressed, you need to take strong measures to stop or slow the spread. In the place where I live, with tracing and with good testing (if it were available), maybe we could live close to normal lives. One thing that I don't think's debatable, we should have been and should be pumping lots of dollars and effort into things like testing, tracing, and masks for the general population in places where this isn't out of control. The investment would be a drop in the bucket compared to benefits, both for the economy and peoples' lives.
Tiny is online now   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 01:48 PM   #13
Tiny
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Mar 4, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 8,893
Encounters: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by friendly fred View Post
I'm going to say that 50,000 die, more or less the equivalent of 5 to 10 metropolises the size of NYC, times it's death rate, plus an equal number of cases spread out throughout the rest of the country.

I also estimate that if Trump hadn't shut off travel from China early, that number would be much worse.
I hope and pray you're close to right Fred. If you believe China's numbers, and something similar happens here, maybe we'll be at that level or lower here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adav8s28 View Post
Assuming social distancing is not practiced for the rest of the year.

327,000,000 people x 0.4 infection rate x .012 mortality rate = 1,569,600 deaths
Hopefully the mortality rate will be lower, although there are experts who know more than any of us who would believe 1.2% is reasonable. What gives me some hope is the Diamond Princess cruise liner. Oeb has posted a good bit about this. They tested everyone on board, and the mortality rate so far (more passengers may die) is around your number, 1.1% or 1.2%. However, the passengers were older than average. Presumably if the age distribution on the ship were closer to what we've got overall in the USA, the mortality rate would be lower.
Tiny is online now   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 02:17 PM   #14
gnadfly
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 14,460
Default

I'm not going to guess but ask a similar question: How many people in Brazil are going to die from CV? We won't know. We won't know how many people acquired it either. And they had Carnival. And they have some medical infrastructure. Parts are extremely densely populated.

But I'll guess they won't shut down businesses across Brazil for weeks. The death from starvation and brutality will pale in comparison to the CV deaths.
gnadfly is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 02:22 PM   #15
gnadfly
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 14,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiny View Post
To be clear, by fools game I meant that it may be impossible to come up with a good estimate of what dollar value we're putting on a life for any given policy or plan of action. Clearly, in New York City where the health system is severely stressed, you need to take strong measures to stop or slow the spread. In the place where I live, with tracing and with good testing (if it were available), maybe we could live close to normal lives. One thing that I don't think's debatable, we should have been and should be pumping lots of dollars and effort into things like testing, tracing, and masks for the general population in places where this isn't out of control. The investment would be a drop in the bucket compared to benefits, both for the economy and peoples' lives.
Right. Mexia will be OK without shutting down.
gnadfly is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved