But you also have to factor in what the S&P was at in 2008 vs 2019.
In 2008, a 3% increase was 40 points. In 2019, it was 80+ points.
coronavirus and presidential election
- Thread starter bullitpdq68
- Start date
In 2008, a 3% increase was 40 points. In 2019, it was 80+ points.
The #1 piece of advice from public health experts is that the best ways to avoid getting the disease involve:
- Social distancing, in particular avoiding large indoor crowds
- Frequent hand washing
- Not touching your face
It's quite rational for people to want to follow that advice!
I agree the death rate of identified cases is surely overstated due to sampling bias, but (a) South Korea carried out a much more robust testing process and still found there to be a material death risk relative to normal illnesses, especially for the elderly, (b) we have the cruise ship sample of 700 people that acts as another control group with strong testing, and (c) epidemiologists have models that can create a reasonable range of potential death rates by considering what % of cases are likely being undercounted.
I say all of this as someone who has taken 4 flights in the last two days and who likely will be on the road again next week.
No one evaluates investment performance in nominal terms. The percentage change is what matters, especially when you're evaluating volatility.
Last edited:
Not 100% true at all.
3% daily increase in 2008 was the same as a 1.8% increase in 2019.
And you looking at daily numbers is meaningless. 20 days of 3% increase in 2008 and at the end of the year it was down over 500 points from where it started. In 2019, it was up over 675 points.
Daily increases mean nothing.
Last edited:
No and I can agree with that, there is nothing wrong with taking some precaution. But there is no place for hoarding Toilet paper during this, that is an irrational fear!
Remind me to never, ever, ever listen to you about the markets if this is really how you evaluate them.
If your boss comes to you and says a 2% raise this year is ok because it's the same as a 3.2% raise 10 years ago, would you go, gosh, that sounds good? Of course you wouldn't! The percentage change is what matters. Not a nominal amount.
The stock market is no different. It's a measure of how our economy has changed. Yeah, it's true that the nominal size has grown, but if you're trying to understand what the market is telling you, you gotta look at the percentage change, not the change in nominal points.
To take this to a bit of an absurd level, it's like saying the black Friday drop in 1987 of 508 points (22%!) was only half as bad as the drop we had on Monday.
You’re the one looking at it from a daily point of view. You cited in 2008 that market had an increase of 3% 20 days that year. And 2012-2019 there were only 3 days of a 3% increase.
I’m saying that is meaningless.
If you put 10k in the S&P on Jan 1, 2008 and Jan 1, 2019... Which would have a better return?
In the long run, maybe 2008. You don't invest in stocks with a 1 year time horizon. Neither time was a fantastic time to buy the market overall given historical P/E or cash flow views.
I'm looking at it from a long-term point of view. My point is the daily action over the last two weeks is telling us that we are in a time of tremendous uncertainty and the market is now quite concerned about a recession. When someone posts "yeah, but we went up 3% today!"...that's something you need to look at as part of a pattern, and a pattern of large changes is historically associated with times of stock market declines, not rises.
Odds of Dying..
See post above.....with stat's thank you B68
It seems to me your view point is on the irrational side, and normally you come across as extremely rational.
True The risk for older People is a concern. After that it's pretty spot on with the flu as a Fatality rate. We don't crash the Stock market, Cancel College and Professional events over the Flu every year. We haven't banned Motor vehicles because 1.25 million a year die on the road. We just accept that risk and go on because it's become common place.
The virus is just new and it's Being Over blown and people love a good doomsday conspiracy....Y2K anyone...ANYONE, if you are the sort that is worried about death then I get it, but death is coming to us all My concern is about living not dying. But to each his own.
Last edited:
The Flu isn't a one off event and nobody get's up in arms about it, this isn't much different than another strain of the Flu outside of the fact that it's harder on the Older Population. So why so concerned? To the rest of the population the fatality rate is on par with the Flu.
CDC guy said today it is 10 times more deadly that the flu. His words ,not mine.
I get a flu shot every year and avoid people with the flu. The flu is also much less deadly than this.
when I’m truly old I’ll likely be even more cautious given the decline I’ll see in my immune system
And it’s simply not true that the death rate is comparable to the average flu season based upon the best available data we have.
I’m not hiding at home or something crazy. I’ve taken plane flights already this week.
But I am saying we should expect the government to want us to take pretty severe measures in places with outbreaks given the implications for old people. And it is rational to protect yourself from something that is unknown.
you should think of this as worse than the flu given the uncertainty and death stats to date. We are talking about unpredictably of DEATH over a short term time horizon. That’s not something a rational person ignores.
people make all sorts of irrational decisions. Avoiding what could be their most likely cause of preventable death over the next six months is very rational! We aren’t talking about avoiding a 1,000 mile car ride or hiding inside every time there’s a raindrop to not get struck by lightning. We are talking about something with severe potential that we can mitigate via social distancing.
I get a flu shot every year as well...required by my job and I want it because, I had the H1N1 bad....out of work 10 days, refused to be hospitalized. Probably not smart, but before that I really didn't understand how the Flu killed people. But once you have it that bad it became real apparent that the young and Old could easily die.
So I get the concern. But this is being way overblown. They know that the 15% mortality rate of the Old is skewing the Death rate...
Of course it is. But old people are a part of society and it’s reasonable for the govt to ask the young to play their part when experts like the CDC and NIH want that to happen
I'm not my brothers Keeper. If Old people want to self quarantine then fine. Just count me out. My risk is around 1.3% ....I drink Whiskey,Beer,Smoke Cigars,Chew Taylors Pride Plug and eat Steak about 3 times a week(Love owning Cattle) topped off with Big Burgers and Fries that I cook with Lard. The C-Virus is a Non-worry for me.
My mom and Dad are both High risk for getting it, Old and not in great health. I told them it might be prudent not to go to Church, Ball games, community center. They just laughed about it, said at their age something was going to eventually get them.
So True we all are born with a expiration date.. how about we stop trying to force people live as long as they can by not doing what makes them happy.
My mom and Dad are both High risk for getting it, Old and not in great health. I told them it might be prudent not to go to Church, Ball games, community center. They just laughed about it, said at their age something was going to eventually get them.
So True we all are born with a expiration date.. how about we stop trying to force people live as long as they can by not doing what makes them happy.
Which is down from 34 times more deadly so it is progress but yes it is worse than the seasonal
Flu so far.
For those over 60 years of age yes it's worse....For those of us under not so much. Also as I've posted before we haven't tested enough to actually get a exposure rate either. According to one model 60-85% of the U.S. population could of already been exposed. That even drops the rate lower.
BINGO! That's the problem! We don't have a clue how many are infected so we know very little about how it's going to shake out. I'll guarantee you if and when testing gets in full swing we'll have some crazy numbers and we won't know if they're new case or not. I saw last that in China and Italy there is more evidence now that even people in their 30's and 40's are being affected more than they thought.
GF says Kits are still throwing 30% rate of false positives..The data my never be correct.
That was a concern of mine with all the talk about the rush to get kits out for testing.
No, again you are showing your immaturity It's laughable like a weak minded child to a degree, I get it dealing with data and facts sort of crumbles your emotional house of cards and exposes your weakness maybe you can work on that and do better....the lab's across the U.S. have compiled data that they are getting false positives . Then they are also sent off to state, then fed's. One of the positives in this county has now a negative and all precautions have been removed.
They are using the very hard to get tests multiple times on the same people?
Yes. Someone who rests positive will be tested again plus they determine recovery by negative tests on consecutive days.
So how do you decide which test is right, the one said positive or the one that said negative? If they test positive first do they do it again to see if it comes back negative? That could go on forever while using up tests that are need all over the country.
They don’t immediately test them right after a positive test, but yes, they do retest them until they get at least two negative tests in a row.
You’re right, it uses up tests. But how else do you suggest they determine someone has recovered from the virus?
I would think because they get better. They don't give you another flu test to see if you're really over the flu.
As has been mentioned ad naseum this is not just the flu. The protocol has been to test people previously infected for consecutive days to see if recovered. That is why the officially recovered number creeps up slowly.
Then NO one should be complaining about a shortage of tests. You find out if they get better. Why would you keep testing them if they have NOT gotten better?
Some people don’t even show symptoms!!
People get sick, test positive, feel better and can still test positive. That is why they test multiple times!
If you don't show symptoms you ain't gettin a test. There is reason they want you stay out of the public for 14 days.
They don’t have tests everywhere. It is possible to have enough tests at the moment but not having them all where they are needed. If you don’t follow proper testing procedures then what use is it to have and administer the freaking tests? It isn’t like more tests aren’t being produced. Most people do not need to be tested at this point.
I’m not sure why it’s so hard for you to understand that someone “getting better” doesn’t quite equate to them not having the virus.
