CoronaVirus - Your Country is Not Doing Better than Mine - This is Not a Horse Race

One thing that really annoys me about the reporting and conversations on the current CoronaVirus global infections, is the way the governments, the media, and even us personally, keep comparing countries as if it is some type of horse race... as if there is a comparable difference.

As if one country is doing better than another country.

Guess what?

Unless the country is 100% isolated, we are all exactly the same... maybe just a few weeks either way depending on the severity of the measures being taken... that's exponentials for you. There are only 2 countries, that I can see, that are not part of the global population anymore (100% isolated); North Korea and maybe Bahrain.

Rather than looking forward as what numbers will look like tomorrow or next week, the better way is to work backwards from global population (minus N. Korea and Bahrain), find an averaged inflection point from a set of exponential's fitting with our current infection totals and rate what it will look like based on where we currently are), and then divide your countries population to figure out how many infected you will be having at the inflection point... that is what will happen, based on our numbers and mathematics, regardless of ANY measures your country puts into place... unless 100% isolated.

The numbers look something like:
Inflection point - Mid-May to Mid-June globally, (this means every country in the world will experience those numbers between this point in time)
It equates to about 10-12 million infections a day globally (divide by your countries population to figure out what your daily infection rate at that point)
Once we reach inflection, the graph will look linear (10-12 million a day consistently for at least a couple weeks), then you will see number s decline (in the first year).

This is fundamental and mathematics... if still connected as a population (just one supply chain), there is NO difference between countries at all.

Curious what prompted this oratory ? %'s dying evenly spaced ? Seems populous impoverished countries would be ill-fated and susceptible far more than where sanitary/medical measures are present...

a reply to: Plotus

What triggered it is seeing us all saying one country is doing better than another, when it's a complete fallacy unless a country is 100% isolated.

Singapore looking better than the USA currently, for instance, is leading us all into a false sense of security. If there is even one flight, or one supply ship between countries, statistically the "odds" are no longer 100% certain, so the spread continues... just slower, or even seemingly a lot slower.

But even at a "slower", or even "really slow" rate of infection, the global exponential will still reach it's inflection point somewhere between mid May and mid June... 10-12 million infected a day globally... mathematically, or in other words irrefutably, based on current trend... and for the last 12 weeks we haven't actually seen the curve change at all... so looking on track.

Worse, unless we realise this globally right now, even if a country like Singapore does come through this year with only a 20% of population infected (when there is a functioning global economy), then that just means they have 80% to be infected during year two.

Any country looking like they are doing well this year, will have a terrible second year when the rest of the world is still trying to recover from the first year.

That's what triggered it... how blind we are all being.

"Any country looking like they are doing well this year, will have a terrible second year when the rest of the world is still trying to recover from the first year. "

Indeed there will be harm and recovery will be at the bottom first. But as it gains momentum it will like be spoken of as significant gains....

The WILD CARD would be a vacine.... ?

a reply to: Plotus

You are right that it "seems" populous or impoverished countries will do worse, but exponentials' don't work with the human brain... with exponentials, what seems intuitive is not.

Rather we can mathematically model exactly what is happening... and we have... so we know exactly what to expect in terms of numbers... it's just being fundamentally ignored, because it doesn't "seem" intuitive... instead it is surprising... every day.

Health system does matter, but only when it is not overwhelmed, and only in the context of a working global economy; economy is working this year, hence 1st worlds' will look good. Next year, after a year of decline (and maybe a little bit of recovery), There will be much more pressure on the surviving systems for "Season 2"... and then there will be a Season 3 and 4 and 5 as we tend towards total population infection, and hopefully a beginning to herd immunity.

a reply to: Plotus

Unfortunately, I doubt it... based on it's characteristics, it seems a vaccine for this virus will be about as successful as a vaccine for a common cold or the common flu... not very effective at best.

Here is part of a comment of mine from another thread where I address what could turn the tide:

We are facing two catastrophic events simultaneously, both a global pandemic and global depression at the same time, unprecedented in human history.

There are only two ways out of this:

1. A cure, not a vaccine (there are some really interesting innovations in this space at the moment, so may be possible).

2. Universal living wage for everyone in the world (will never happen), but it is the only way to convert locked up wealth into work and resource for the foreseeable future, before the "value" of the wealth disappears, and becomes useless.

That's my opinion anyway.

I see what your saying. Again a wild card would be a vaccine, However as you point out diminishing wellness during each successive year would lead to a saturation of the entire population of earth, additionally whatever animals could be contaminated

a reply to: Plotus

Unfortunately yes... so really this is a thread, trying to at least put my tiny little voice out there, with some logical arguments to cut through the oceans of data we can get distracted by.

Just my frustration at people focusing on the details and missing the big picture.

a reply to: Plotus

Funnily enough, just reading your signature... my signature is discussing why de-population is the most wrong of all theories in our world.

We fundamentally need more population to reach higher technology bands... you don't get iPhones with "... 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature". Bah!

It's my biggest fear for this Pandemic, that we will lose significant population, pushing us back decades in terms of our potential technology band.

Yes..... and some part of me sees that as 'not so bad' taking a break on tech...
No, it's not practical, only detrimental to our civilization. Our needs at this point outweigh the perceived calmness that a break or rest would bring. Tech is needed to support those dreams and advances in the pipeline. I guess a 'break' and 'the good old days' are unimportant.


a reply to: puzzlesphere

a reply to: Plotus

This is where I am split... or maybe not, as the eventual endpoint of low population and stagnant technology innovation is a slow species death over millennia.

I agree on many levels about a break from technology, and desire it in many ways (I really wish I had a farm sometimes... a self-sufficient piece of land is very desirable at the moment)... technology as a means unto itself is extraordinarily dangerous.

On the flip side... the way I perceive humanity is as a race.

It is a race between population size (relating to technology band) on our planet, balanced with total available resource.

The race is, can we reach a high enough technology band to make getting off the planet possible before we run out of planetary resources?

Our planet can easily support 150 billion (there are studies) with the right resource management, and most likely could handle half a trillion population as higher technology bands are reached.

Once we reach those types of numbers of population, technology bands that include space and populating orbit (you need a LOT of people for that) become possible.

This puts us one step close to solving the planet's resource limitations by extending to the solar systems resource band.

That's the race, and why we need population.. and in a sense, we will be unable to obtain a balance with our planet until we no longer have to rely on it for resource.

Interestingly, I see this pandemic as an opportunity for the world to transition to a new system... sounds a bit NWO... but in a sense was always going to be a necessary transition for humanity.

Trotsky said that the only way to reach a truly working socialist society is through the pinnacle of a capitalist society. He just never suggested how such a thing could be even vaguely possible.

A byproduct of this particular type of catastrophe, is that nothing has actually changed other than our perception of value (capitalism) and putting aside the terrible tragedy of the many people that will die from the virus. Farmers are still collecting crops, doctors still know how to diagnose, scientists still know how to science, a truck still works, all assets are still in place, etc.

It may be possible to actualize a socialist society through a capitalist paradigm (which is failing as we speak by the way), by transitioning resource management from a tiered and structured organizational model (think of a landscape of pyramids with governments, organizations and dynasties at the tops of those pyramids) to a networked and node based model (imagine the landscape of pyramids flattened up to a 2D plane, a description of a network, where the "nodes" are the "tops" of the pyramids)... the two systems directly mimic each other at this particular point in time.

"Interestingly, I see this pandemic as an opportunity for the world to transition to a new system... sounds a bit NWO... but in a sense was always going to be a necessary transition for humanity".


One day Bill Gates and some surf bums were setting on a wall at Newport Beach discussing Bill's idea for computers and the world wide web..

Now we almost have Artificial intelligence, and robots of every possible configuration.

It was all a dream, ten years later Mario Brothers in your leisure time.

Bahrain is protected? They got an anti-virus shield...lol

NK has it too, just not telling...

a reply to: Xtrozero

I didn't say "protected", I said "100% isolated form the global population"... quite the difference.

By being 100% isolated, the effective global population is reduced by their populations.

It is the only way not to be part of the continuing (for years) Global Exponential Curve that the rest of us are hurtling along.

a reply to: Plotus

You are absolutely correct... and my gut tells me very strongly that this may very well have been Bill Gates. It all fits too perfectly... especially seeing him "leave Microsoft to pursue philanthropy"... right at the start of the Pandemic?!?!?"... sure buddy.

If we can ever find out for sure... then he IS a truly evil man... and deserves to suffer for as long as we can keep him alive.

But as I said in another thread... it doesn't actually matter any more. Any elites or TPTB, if they did release this, have totally screwed themselves too. I suspect he/they didn't (if there is a real conspiracy there) "imagine" it would be so bad... I suspect he thought our governments would either go all "Fascist Lock down" or "instantly except a socialist living wage"... either would be a good outcome towards one world NWO... or he actually wants to see all he stubborn or unprepared countries suffer horrifically for years.

The way to reach "utopia" is not through the deaths of billions.

a reply to: puzzlesphere

Im genuinely glad to see someone mention "resource management" with regards to the topic of population.

Thats always been the issue, in my mind. Efficient use of resources might be one of the biggest, most effective areas of study when it comes to environmental impact. It includes everything from basic use (something like MPG in cars) to general manufacturing processes (like unnecessarily shipping parts repeatedly before the final product).

I have my own ideas, as I went into in a thread, so I wont go further off topic here

Youre right though, we are all in this together in more ways than just covid. These issues we are having didnt just pop into existence with this virus.

The difficulty that Ive noticed over the years is that so many things can get drowned out by the sheer volume of communication in the internet. Exacerbating this is the fact that much of what DOES get heard is determined by people sharing something that instills extreme reaction & emotion for likes and shares. It doesnt need to be true or anything either. Just elicit an extreme response.

An entire system of ad revenue revolves around this specifically, and there is a lot of money there. A lot.

a reply to: Serdgiam

There was a lot of money there couple of months ago... not so much now. lol...

These are the conversations that we need to be having. I completely agree about the information overload.

I started reading your thread... but will have to come back to it later as it is long, but seems right up my alley.

For the rest of the world, your thread falls into the "too much information" basket... even my thread does... I spend my life trying to reduce thousands of words to intuitive sentences and simple ideas for the lowest common denominator.

Where I am at, in terms of governments... is, If they/we are asking questions that fundamentally return "50/50" response (elections between two people, 51% wins, partisan politics, "do you like chocolate or vanilla", etc), then we are asking the wrong questions.

Our "questions" need to be asked in a way that we tend towards consensus.