Eric Zuesse
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Eric Zuesse
According to https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/china/, which obtains its information from only the most reliable sources, here are the main statistics regarding coronavirus-19 cases in China:
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/china/
as of today, March 17th:
WORLD / COUNTRIES / CHINA
Last updated: March 17, 2020, 14:20 GMT
China
Coronavirus Cases: 80,881
Deaths: 3,226
Recovered: 68,715
ACTIVE CASES
8,940 Currently Infected Patients
5,714 (64%) in Mild Condition
3,226 (36%) Serious or Critical
Total Coronavirus Cases in China:
Jan 22 near 0
Feb 11 50K
Feb 12 60K
Feb 15 70K
Feb 27 80K
Mar 13 80K
That’s 0 to 50K in 20 days, and in only 16 more days there was a stable total of 80K cases reached, or 80,000 Chinese who had been hit by the coronavirus-19 infection.
This governmental performance will be compared with that of other countries and show the relative effectiveness and ineffectiveness of the various governments around the world in protecting their people from this sudden and extremely dire threat to their safety and security. This will be the most reliable existing single global statistical indicator of how good and how bad the various countries’ governments are, regarding the national security, or the protection of the lives and welfare, of their citizens. This is not a military measure of that, but it might be a more trustworthy measure, because coronavirus-19 is possibly an even bigger threat to the lives and welfare of the world’s peoples than a global nuclear war, WW III, would be; and it is surely one of the biggest such threats in the present era of a highly globalized economy.
On Monday, March 16th, Zero Hedge bannered “‘Half Of America Will Get Sick’: Here Is What Goldman Told 1,500 Clients In Its Emergency Sunday Conference Call” and reported that they said “Peak-virus is expected over the next eight weeks, declining thereafter.” That’s about 60 days to achieve what China achieved in about 50 days. However, China was able to achieve that only because it is a much more mutually cooperative society, culture, and society, than exists in the United States. Perhaps Goldman Sachs simply does not want to panic their client-base. Of course, by the time those 60 days will have passed, we will have a much clearer idea of what the true situation has been.
Furthermore: “50% of Americans will contract the virus (150m people).” So: that “peak-virus” occurring in 60 days would be compared to 80,000 cases within 50 days in China. It would be maxing-out not at 80,000 out of 1,400,000,000 Chinese or .006% of the Chinese population, but at 50% of the population, or 165,000,000 out of America’s 330,000,000 population. Really? It would be 8,333 times higher a percentage of Americans who will get hit than of Chinese who did?
And, according to Goldman, communicating to their 1,500 clients, “S&P 500 will see a negative growth rate of -15% to -20% for 2020 overall.” A very bad year, but the S&P declined -28.48% in 1930, -47.04% in 1931, -38.64% in 1937, and -38.64% in 1917 — that century’s four worst years. Goldman doesn’t expect 2020 to be anywhere near that bad. (Or, at least, this is what they are telling their clients. The way they calculated that would be interesting to see.)
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Interesting article. Northern Ireland and Ireland as a whole has been fairly lucky and even the UK as a whole is largely skewed by London. Looking in isolation many regional areas who have basically superceded any government advice and fallen back on old measures (isolation, hygene and a slower way of doing things) have faired better. Add to that more rural communities tend toward social care and have worked out better for it. It may even show the difference between the cut throat urbanites and resourceful ‘bumpkins’.
Just looking at the wider stats. Worldwide there have been 194,656 total confirmed cases (will rise) 12,213 of those are new in the last 24 hours 7,894 deaths so far globally 747 in the last 24 hours. 105,682 cases are active and under review 81,080 have to far recovered So far just shy of 50% have recovered with no notable complication. There’s still a bit to go, but the relative numbers globally aren’t as scary as some may portray. Still enough to keep an eye on, but enough to question some of the tripe we’re being fed. Also enough to… Read more »
Not sure where you get that those who recover do so with no notable complication. Of the 15-20% that are severe cases, some of those recover with damaged lungs. Once a respirator is needed during treatment, the chance of lung damage increases. Those in the 80% with only mild symptoms will most likely recover with no notable complication. The good news is that a new study shows that immunity without reinfection is a distinct possibility, but one study with a small sample is not enough to go on, although a start. Since the rate of infection is probably much higher… Read more »
There are two other column regarding severity and iirc there is text mentioning what is meant by severity. Regardless you do have a point, but I would take it still as those recovering with no lasting effect from the virus.
Interesting about China – whether or not one agrees with the cure being probably worse than the problem (how many people died of other c. illnesses in the same period ? It would dwarf the coronavirus figure). However’ where I really differ from Eric Zuesse is quoting the bloodsucking Goldman Sachs as any sort of reliable forecaster of what may happen in the US. Tealeaves would be more reliable and would not have a vested interest in misleading investors Certainly in Britain all sorts of ludicrous figures have been bandied around. Yet the 1918-19 Spanish flu only killed 200,000 in… Read more »
While I agree on the mass hysteria, no idea where you get your number for the Spanish Flu. The low estimate is 17million, the high estimate is 100 million. At a time when the world population was around 1.8Billion: “How many people died in the Spanish flu and other influenza pandemics? Global deaths of the Spanish flu Several research teams have worked on the difficult problem of reconstructing the global health impact of the pandemic. There is now a lot of variability in these estimates and while the academic discussions continue the range of estimates gives us an understanding of… Read more »
“this sudden and extremely dire threat to their safety and security” Seriously?!