COVID-19 Megathread 5: The Trumps catch COVID-19

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

And this isn’t how Europe deals with general unemployment, right?  Is it a completely new set of  programs that multiple countries managed to efficiently assemble regardless of ideology of the government or opposition?  That also doesn’t strike me as a progressive vs. conservative difference.

The reason for paying employers is so they keep people employed rather than firing them. That way it's not an unemployment issue at all. Basically, it allows the businesses to not sink from having to continue to pay wages, but also not lose their employees. It's a much better way to maintain the shape of the economy, IMO.

I think I agree with this.
I’m just wondering why it seems like both parties in the US thought that just directly giving people extra money was a better solution.  Like, what’s the other side of the argument, whether you are a progressive or a conservative?

[Koharu]

And this isn’t how Europe deals with general unemployment, right?  Is it a completely new set of  programs that multiple countries managed to efficiently assemble regardless of ideology of the government or opposition?  That also doesn’t strike me as a progressive vs. conservative difference.

The reason for paying employers is so they keep people employed rather than firing them. That way it's not an unemployment issue at all. Basically, it allows the businesses to not sink from having to continue to pay wages, but also not lose their employees. It's a much better way to maintain the shape of the economy, IMO.

I think I agree with this.
I’m just wondering why it seems like both parties in the US thought that just directly giving people extra money was a better solution.  Like, what’s the other side of the argument, whether you are a progressive or a conservative?

I think here there's not even the consideration of directly paying a company just for payroll. We're too hands-off for that sort of intervention, which is absolutely ridiculous, but America on the whole believes corporations should have freedom to choose what to do, and if we're going to give them money, it'll have no real strings attached for what they have to use it for. Can't interfere with the free market etc.

[ProudModerate2]

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1279444860957626370

[Koharu]

https://twitter.com/madison_365/status/1279430987118772224?s=20

[Landslide Lyndon]

https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1279445550019076096

[jimrtex]

I'd really like to see the partisan difference in COVID infections and deaths.  You can't figure out individual partisan leans, but maybe divide it up into counties/precincts and weight by Trump/Clinton vote %.

My guess?

The initial wave mostly hit Clinton voters, because it was spreading most quickly in big cities with very concentrated populations.

But this "second wave" (not really the second wave, we still have that to look forward to) is going to be 70-80% Trump voters.  Those are the people not wearing masks.  Those are the people not socially distancing.  Those are the people refusing to take this seriously.  And those are the people who are going to get infected and die.  And thanks to them, we won't be able to re-open.  Thanks to them, plenty of their friends and family will also get sick and die.  Ironically, thanks to them, Trump's odds of re-election will continue to dwindle as the crisis continues.

There is evidence that the new infectees are disproportionately young (in Hays County, Texas, over half are 20-29). The superspreader events were the protests/riots, followed by bar hopping to brag about their exploits. Those requiring hospitalization are likely to be heavier drug users.

Quite like leftist Democrats.

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

I'd really like to see the partisan difference in COVID infections and deaths.  You can't figure out individual partisan leans, but maybe divide it up into counties/precincts and weight by Trump/Clinton vote %.

My guess?

The initial wave mostly hit Clinton voters, because it was spreading most quickly in big cities with very concentrated populations.

But this "second wave" (not really the second wave, we still have that to look forward to) is going to be 70-80% Trump voters.  Those are the people not wearing masks.  Those are the people not socially distancing.  Those are the people refusing to take this seriously.  And those are the people who are going to get infected and die.  And thanks to them, we won't be able to re-open.  Thanks to them, plenty of their friends and family will also get sick and die.  Ironically, thanks to them, Trump's odds of re-election will continue to dwindle as the crisis continues.

There is evidence that the new infectees are disproportionately young (in Hays County, Texas, over half are 20-29). The superspreader events were the protests/riots, followed by bar hopping to brag about their exploits. Those requiring hospitalization are likely to be heavier drug users.

Quite like leftist Democrats.

Some of us non-leftist-non-Democrats enjoy heavy drug use, thank you very much. 

[Landslide Lyndon]

I'd really like to see the partisan difference in COVID infections and deaths.  You can't figure out individual partisan leans, but maybe divide it up into counties/precincts and weight by Trump/Clinton vote %.

My guess?

The initial wave mostly hit Clinton voters, because it was spreading most quickly in big cities with very concentrated populations.

But this "second wave" (not really the second wave, we still have that to look forward to) is going to be 70-80% Trump voters.  Those are the people not wearing masks.  Those are the people not socially distancing.  Those are the people refusing to take this seriously.  And those are the people who are going to get infected and die.  And thanks to them, we won't be able to re-open.  Thanks to them, plenty of their friends and family will also get sick and die.  Ironically, thanks to them, Trump's odds of re-election will continue to dwindle as the crisis continues.

There is evidence that the new infectees are disproportionately young (in Hays County, Texas, over half are 20-29). The superspreader events were the protests/riots, followed by bar hopping to brag about their exploits. Those requiring hospitalization are likely to be heavier drug users.

Quite like leftist Democrats.

If protests were the superspreader events then why Minnesota, DC, and New York haven't seen any significant spike?
I don't expect any (rational) answer from you, just putting it out there.

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1279487628732256257

[jimrtex]

And this isn’t how Europe deals with general unemployment, right?  Is it a completely new set of  programs that multiple countries managed to efficiently assemble regardless of ideology of the government or opposition?  That also doesn’t strike me as a progressive vs. conservative difference.

The reason for paying employers is so they keep people employed rather than firing them. That way it's not an unemployment issue at all. Basically, it allows the businesses to not sink from having to continue to pay wages, but also not lose their employees. It's a much better way to maintain the shape of the economy, IMO.

I think I agree with this.
I’m just wondering why it seems like both parties in the US thought that just directly giving people extra money was a better solution.  Like, what’s the other side of the argument, whether you are a progressive or a conservative?

The loans to small businesses were based on requiring them to pay their employees, with forgiveness of the loan if they did so. One problem with this was at the same time there was a bonus payment for unemployment benefits, such that some employees could make more money being unemployed than working. This infuriated the employees that their employers required them to work, and the employers were dismayed to discover their employees were lazy layabouts.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

And this isn’t how Europe deals with general unemployment, right?  Is it a completely new set of  programs that multiple countries managed to efficiently assemble regardless of ideology of the government or opposition?  That also doesn’t strike me as a progressive vs. conservative difference.

The reason for paying employers is so they keep people employed rather than firing them. That way it's not an unemployment issue at all. Basically, it allows the businesses to not sink from having to continue to pay wages, but also not lose their employees. It's a much better way to maintain the shape of the economy, IMO.

I think I agree with this.
I’m just wondering why it seems like both parties in the US thought that just directly giving people extra money was a better solution.  Like, what’s the other side of the argument, whether you are a progressive or a conservative?

The loans to small businesses were based on requiring them to pay their employees, with forgiveness of the loan if they did so. One problem with this was at the same time there was a bonus payment for unemployment benefits, such that some employees could make more money being unemployed than working. This infuriated the employees that their employers required them to work, and the employers were dismayed to discover their employees were lazy layabouts.

This is a nice example of a particular split in Republican thinking.

When large corporations or wealthy individuals take advantage of the technicalities of law and finance to their advantage (i.e. Donald Trump's self-described motivation behind his many bankruptcies), Republicans see it as "being smart" or "the free market in action". But when working-class individuals do the same thing, they're described as shameful degenerates.

[jimrtex]

I'd really like to see the partisan difference in COVID infections and deaths.  You can't figure out individual partisan leans, but maybe divide it up into counties/precincts and weight by Trump/Clinton vote %.

My guess?

The initial wave mostly hit Clinton voters, because it was spreading most quickly in big cities with very concentrated populations.

But this "second wave" (not really the second wave, we still have that to look forward to) is going to be 70-80% Trump voters.  Those are the people not wearing masks.  Those are the people not socially distancing.  Those are the people refusing to take this seriously.  And those are the people who are going to get infected and die.  And thanks to them, we won't be able to re-open.  Thanks to them, plenty of their friends and family will also get sick and die.  Ironically, thanks to them, Trump's odds of re-election will continue to dwindle as the crisis continues.

There is evidence that the new infectees are disproportionately young (in Hays County, Texas, over half are 20-29). The superspreader events were the protests/riots, followed by bar hopping to brag about their exploits. Those requiring hospitalization are likely to be heavier drug users.

Quite like leftist Democrats.

If protests were the superspreader events then why Minnesota, DC, and New York haven't seen any significant spike?
I don't expect any (rational) answer from you, just putting it out there.

Minnesota has seen a sharp increase in the share of 20-29 YO as a percentage of infectees. See graphs upthread. In additions outbreaks have been reported that are associated with four bars, two adjacent to the University of Minnesota campus in Minneapolis, and two in Mankato near to the Minnesota State University campus.

Smoke inhalation also likely exacerbates diseases that attack the lungs. Really nasty chemicals are released when buildings burn.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Minnesota has seen a sharp increase in the share of 20-29 YO as a percentage of infectees.

That' irrelevant, but you already knew that.

[Koharu]

Not sure where you're getting the data about the protests and would like to see information backing that up. Here in Wisconsin, it's an increase among young people as well, but a large percentage traced back to bars, not protests.

Protests are not currently associated with Dane County's rise in COVID-19 cases

What the data look like today

Here’s a recap of the data from June:

622 people tested positive for COVID-19 in Dane County between June 1 through June 24. For the question "In the 14 days before symptom onset, did you attend a gathering, party, or meeting with people from outside your household":

•     288 answered "No."
•     213 answered "Yes", and of those, 12 said they had attended a protest.
•     6 answered "Unknown."

From June 13 through June 26, 614 people tested positive for COVID-19 in Dane County. Here’s what we know about these cases:

•     45% of cases interviewed reported attending a gathering or party with people outside of their household.
•     28% of cases (a total of 172) were associated with a cluster: 132 from bars, 14 from workplaces, 11 from congregate facilities, 3 from daycares/preschools, and 12 from other clusters.

Our data are not showing a large impact from protests at this time. This makes sense when thinking about what protests look like: they are outside, many people are wearing masks, and people are moving and not always near the same people for an extended period of time. With what we know about COVID-19, this activity is going to be less risky than gatherings that are indoors, do not have physical distancing, do not have people wearing masks, and include the same people near each other for extended periods of time.

[TJ in Oregon]

Not sure where you're getting the data about the protests and would like to see information backing that up. Here in Wisconsin, it's an increase among young people as well, but a large percentage traced back to bars, not protests.

Protests are not currently associated with Dane County's rise in COVID-19 cases

What the data look like today

Here’s a recap of the data from June:

622 people tested positive for COVID-19 in Dane County between June 1 through June 24. For the question "In the 14 days before symptom onset, did you attend a gathering, party, or meeting with people from outside your household":

•     288 answered "No."
•     213 answered "Yes", and of those, 12 said they had attended a protest.
•     6 answered "Unknown."

From June 13 through June 26, 614 people tested positive for COVID-19 in Dane County. Here’s what we know about these cases:

•     45% of cases interviewed reported attending a gathering or party with people outside of their household.
•     28% of cases (a total of 172) were associated with a cluster: 132 from bars, 14 from workplaces, 11 from congregate facilities, 3 from daycares/preschools, and 12 from other clusters.

Our data are not showing a large impact from protests at this time. This makes sense when thinking about what protests look like: they are outside, many people are wearing masks, and people are moving and not always near the same people for an extended period of time. With what we know about COVID-19, this activity is going to be less risky than gatherings that are indoors, do not have physical distancing, do not have people wearing masks, and include the same people near each other for extended periods of time.

Were people reporting infections asked directly if they attended a protest? If they were only asked the questions listed and 12 people volunteered that they had attended a protest, then the study isn't designed to address that question.

[jimrtex]

Not sure where you're getting the data about the protests and would like to see information backing that up. Here in Wisconsin, it's an increase among young people as well, but a large percentage traced back to bars, not protests.

Protests are not currently associated with Dane County's rise in COVID-19 cases

What the data look like today

Here’s a recap of the data from June:

622 people tested positive for COVID-19 in Dane County between June 1 through June 24. For the question "In the 14 days before symptom onset, did you attend a gathering, party, or meeting with people from outside your household":

•     288 answered "No."
•     213 answered "Yes", and of those, 12 said they had attended a protest.
•     6 answered "Unknown."

From June 13 through June 26, 614 people tested positive for COVID-19 in Dane County. Here’s what we know about these cases:

•     45% of cases interviewed reported attending a gathering or party with people outside of their household.
•     28% of cases (a total of 172) were associated with a cluster: 132 from bars, 14 from workplaces, 11 from congregate facilities, 3 from daycares/preschools, and 12 from other clusters.

Our data are not showing a large impact from protests at this time. This makes sense when thinking about what protests look like: they are outside, many people are wearing masks, and people are moving and not always near the same people for an extended period of time. With what we know about COVID-19, this activity is going to be less risky than gatherings that are indoors, do not have physical distancing, do not have people wearing masks, and include the same people near each other for extended periods of time.

Data Notes for the Week of June 29

49% of cases were between 18-25 (i.e. students or hangers-on at UW). Large numbers infected at bars. It is illegal for those between 18-21 to go to bars. Who goes to bars? People with lots of free time. Parents and those who have get up and go to work limit their time at bars. Protests and bars draw the same customers.

If you go to a kegger, you are pretending that it is like a household because it is in a house.

Bar goers go to protests, protesters go to bars to brag about their exploits. At both types of events, there are large interchanges. Older couples might go to a restaurant and enjoy meal with a glass of wine. They're not shouting to be heard.

[Landslide Lyndon]

49% of cases were between 18-25 (i.e. students or hangers-on at UW). Large numbers infected at bars. It is illegal for those between 18-21 to go to bars. Who goes to bars? People with lots of free time. Parents and those who have get up and go to work limit their time at bars. Protests and bars draw the same customers.

If you go to a kegger, you are pretending that it is like a household because it is in a house.

Bar goers go to protests, protesters go to bars to brag about their exploits. At both types of events, there are large interchanges. Older couples might go to a restaurant and enjoy meal with a glass of wine. They're not shouting to be heard.

tl;dr, you pulled everything out of your ass.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I'd really like to see the partisan difference in COVID infections and deaths.  You can't figure out individual partisan leans, but maybe divide it up into counties/precincts and weight by Trump/Clinton vote %.

My guess?

The initial wave mostly hit Clinton voters, because it was spreading most quickly in big cities with very concentrated populations.

But this "second wave" (not really the second wave, we still have that to look forward to) is going to be 70-80% Trump voters.  Those are the people not wearing masks.  Those are the people not socially distancing.  Those are the people refusing to take this seriously.  And those are the people who are going to get infected and die.  And thanks to them, we won't be able to re-open.  Thanks to them, plenty of their friends and family will also get sick and die.  Ironically, thanks to them, Trump's odds of re-election will continue to dwindle as the crisis continues.

There is evidence that the new infectees are disproportionately young (in Hays County, Texas, over half are 20-29). The superspreader events were the protests/riots, followed by bar hopping to brag about their exploits. Those requiring hospitalization are likely to be heavier drug users.

Quite like leftist Democrats.

Some of us non-leftist-non-Democrats enjoy heavy drug use, thank you very much. 

You identify as a Democrat now? Your welcoming party will sadly have to be delayed though.

[Calthrina950]

Masking confusion at my job today. Interestingly enough, my store has posted signs on the doors which state that "Per local ordinance, a mask or facial covering is required in this facility." However, to my knowledge (and I checked my local news websites), neither Governor Polis, nor the County Board of Commissioners, nor the Colorado Springs City Council have made masks mandatory for the general public, at least not yet. The grocery store across the street from my workplace has had a sign in the front, asking customers to wear a facial covering or mask, for about two months now. However, neither that store-where an employee caught coronavirus at the end of March-nor mines are actually enforcing it.

As in previous weeks, half of the customers today were wearing masks, and half were not. And like before, many of the employees were maskless when they were not on the clock. Frustratingly enough, this included one of my store's own supervisors! As I've said before, they simply do not care, nor do they bother, to wear a mask, and it is absolutely embarrassing. I'm still waiting to see if a mandatory mask mandate will be issued in Colorado Springs or El Paso County.

[Dr. Arch]

The updated numbers for COVID-19 in the U.S. are in for 7/4 per: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

I'm keeping track of these updates daily and updating at the end of the day, whenever all states finish reporting for that day.

Δ Change: Day-by-day Growth or Decline or COVID-19 Spread/Deaths.

• IE: Are we flattening the curve enough?

Σ Increase: A day's contribution to overall percentage growth of COVID-19 cases/deaths.

• IE: What's the overall change in the total?

<Last Numbers for 3/26-3/28 in this Post>
<Last Numbers for 3/29-4/4 in this Post>
<Last Numbers for 4/5-4/11 in this Post>
<Last Numbers for 4/12-4/18 in this Post>
<Last Numbers for 4/19-4/25 in this post>
<Last Numbers for 4/26-5/2 in this post>
<Last Numbers for 5/3-5/9 in this post>
<Last Numbers for 5/10-5/16 in this post>
<Last Numbers for 5/17-5/23 in this post>
<Last Numbers for 5/24-5/30 in this post>
<Last Numbers for 5/31-6/6 in this post>
<Last Numbers for 6/7-6/13 in this post>

6/14: <Sunday>

• Cases: 2,162,144 (+19,920 | Δ Change: ↓21.27% | Σ Increase: ↑0.93%)
• Deaths: 117,853 (+326 | Δ Change: ↓53.56% | Σ Increase: ↑0.28%)

6/15:

• Cases: 2,182,950 (+20,806 | Δ Change: ↑4.45% | Σ Increase: ↑0.96%)
• Deaths: 118,283 (+430 | Δ Change: ↑31.90% | Σ Increase: ↑0.36%)

6/16:

• Cases: 2,208,400 (+25,450 | Δ Change: ↑22.32% | Σ Increase: ↑1.17%)
• Deaths: 119,132 (+849 | Δ Change: ↑97.44% | Σ Increase: ↑0.72%)

6/17:

• Cases: 2,234,471 (+26,071 | Δ Change: ↑2.44% | Σ Increase: ↑1.18%)
• Deaths: 119,941 (+809 | Δ Change: ↓4.71% | Σ Increase: ↑0.68%)

6/18:

• Cases: 2,263,651 (+29,180 | Δ Change: ↑11.93% | Σ Increase: ↑1.31%)
• Deaths: 120,688 (+747 | Δ Change: ↓7.66% | Σ Increase: ↑0.62%)

6/19:

• Cases: 2,297,190 (+33,539 | Δ Change: ↑14.94% | Σ Increase: ↑1.48%)
• Deaths: 121,407 (+719 | Δ Change: ↓3.75% | Σ Increase: ↑0.60%)

6/20:

• Cases: 2,330,578 (+33,388 | Δ Change: ↓0.45% | Σ Increase: ↑1.45%)
• Deaths: 121,980 (+573 | Δ Change: ↓20.31% | Σ Increase: ↑0.47%)

6/21: <Sunday>

• Cases: 2,356,657 (+26,079 | Δ Change: ↓21.89% | Σ Increase: ↑1.12%)
• Deaths: 122,247 (+267 | Δ Change: ↓53.40% | Σ Increase: ↑0.22%)

6/22:

• Cases: 2,388,153 (+31,496 | Δ Change: ↑20.77% | Σ Increase: ↑1.34%)
• Deaths: 122,610 (+363 | Δ Change: ↑35.96% | Σ Increase: ↑0.30%)

6/23:

• Cases: 2,424,168 (+36,015 | Δ Change: ↑14.35% | Σ Increase: ↑1.51%)
• Deaths: 123,473 (+863 | Δ Change: ↑137.74% | Σ Increase: ↑0.70%)
• Death toll inflated by older counts recently dumped by DE

6/24:

• Cases: 2,462,554 (+38,386 | Δ Change: ↑6.18% | Σ Increase: ↑1.58%)
• Deaths: 124,281 (+808 | Δ Change: ↓6.37% | Σ Increase: ↑0.65%)

6/25:

• Cases: 2,504,588 (+42,034 | Δ Change: ↑9.50% | Σ Increase: ↑1.71%)
• Deaths: 126,780 (+2,499 | Δ Change: ↑209.28% | Σ Increase: ↑2.01%)
• Death toll inflated by older counts recently dumped by NJ

6/26:

• Cases: 2,552,940 (+48,352 | Δ Change: ↑15.03% | Σ Increase: ↑1.93%)
• Deaths: 127,640 (+860 | Δ Change: ↓65.59% | Σ Increase: ↑0.68%)
• Death Δ Change affected by older counts recently dumped by NJ on 6/25

6/27:

• Cases: 2,596,537 (+43,597 | Δ Change: ↓9.83% | Σ Increase: ↑1.71%)
• Deaths: 128,152 (+512 | Δ Change: ↓40.47% | Σ Increase: ↑0.40%)

6/28: <Sunday>

• Cases: 2,637,077 (+40,540 | Δ Change: ↓7.01% | Σ Increase: ↑1.56%)
• Deaths: 128,437 (+285 | Δ Change: ↓44.34% | Σ Increase: ↑0.22%)

6/29:

• Cases: 2,681,802 (+44,725 | Δ Change: ↑10.32% | Σ Increase: ↑1.70%)
• Deaths: 128,779 (+342 | Δ Change: ↑20.00% | Σ Increase: ↑0.27%)

6/30:

• Cases: 2,727,853 (+46,051 | Δ Change: ↑2.96% | Σ Increase: ↑1.72%)
• Deaths: 130,122 (+1,343 | Δ Change: ↑292.69% | Σ Increase: ↑1.04%)

7/1:

• Cases: 2,779,953 (+52,100 | Δ Change: ↑13.14% | Σ Increase: ↑1.91%)
• Deaths: 130,798 (+676 | Δ Change: ↓49.66% | Σ Increase: ↑0.52%)

7/2:

• Cases: 2,837,189 (+57,236 | Δ Change: ↑9.86% | Σ Increase: ↑2.06%)
• Deaths: 131,485 (+687 | Δ Change: ↑1.62% | Σ Increase: ↑0.53%)

7/3 (Yesterday):

• Cases: 2,890,588 (+53,399 | Δ Change: ↓6.70% | Σ Increase: ↑1.88%)
• Deaths: 132,101 (+616 | Δ Change: ↓10.33% | Σ Increase: ↑0.47%)

7/4 (Today):

• Cases: 2,935,770 (+45,182 | Δ Change: ↓15.39% | Σ Increase: ↑1.56%)
• Deaths: 132,318 (+212 | Δ Change: ↓65.58% | Σ Increase: ↑0.16%)

[KaiserDave]

Death numbers continue to improve, but god those cases. I think it's clear that the AZ/TX/FL case pumps are much more younger than New York for instance.

[Zaybay]

Death numbers continue to improve, but god those cases. I think it's clear that the AZ/TX/FL case pumps are much more younger than New York for instance.

Yep, this is the case:

But younger people now make up a growing proportion of cases, and they are less likely to die from the disease. In Arizona, people ages 20 to 44 now account for nearly half of all cases. In Florida, which just recorded more than 10,000 new cases in a single day, the median age of residents testing positive has dropped to 35 from 65. And in Texas, more than half of those testing positive are under the age of 50.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/03/health/coronavirus-mortality-testing.html

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

This thing is a buzzsaw for the super-old and sick, and several states made deadly mistakes early on. I don't think the next few weeks are going to be pretty, but there isn't going to be a death wave like we saw in March/April.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

The IFR for a health young person seems to be somewhere between 1-in-2000 and 1-in-5000. 

So 50,000 infected young people per day should only result in 10-25 deaths per day. 

Of course, even if the vast majority of cases are young people, some minority are still going to be older and/or have health conditions, and the vast majority of deaths will still come from that small minority of cases.

[TJ in Oregon]

I think what's probably happening is that the disease is taking off in the early states, only the sickest people got tested, so the median age of people who tested positive was super high. Since society was open when the first outbreaks started, the real infections were probably pretty much evenly distributed across the population. Now, the people getting infected are younger people who feel safe out and about, and since we now have vastly greater testing capabilities, we're picking all of them up; whereas, in NY in March young otherwise healthy people who got the virus would have largely been told to go home and only seek testing/medical care if they needed to go to the hospital.