PSA - COVID-19 going into the fall/winter

[olofscience 489]

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

The supply chain seems to be doing fine just like Joe said. I’ll be delivering an urgently needed important load of peat moss to a greenhouse today. The only problem I see these days is an over supply of capacity because demand is down somewhat.

Well with the huge shift to online logistics must be doing well. My company is noticing higher shipping charges though, ouch. But our supply chain is also pretty intact.

Lockdown is pretty much over in China where we get lots of supplies though. My contact there was pretty surprised when I had to change our receiving address because of the lockdown. China, NZ, Australia, Taiwan, I feel so envious of those countries while we're having to lock down again in England once again. But we're led by a wannabe-trump so that's what you get I guess.

[ryoder 1,590]

32 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

The supply chain seems to be doing fine just like Joe said. I’ll be delivering an urgently needed important load of peat moss to a greenhouse today. The only problem I see these days is an over supply of capacity because demand is down somewhat.

Oh, thank goodness! I was down to my last bag of it!

[airdvr 210]

Prices are on the rise however.  I've noticed it with food and with my builders.  Mostly wood for framing.  From one of my builders to one of my clients building a new home...

Additionally, I want you to remember that the pricing I've given you right now is based on today's (or a month ago's) lumber pricing. There's about $50,000 worth of lumber in your house right now. A similar house we built last year but with a large 3 car garage was $8,000 less for lumber. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

The supply chain seems to be doing fine just like Joe said. I’ll be delivering an urgently needed important load of peat moss to a greenhouse today. The only problem I see these days is an over supply of capacity because demand is down somewhat.

That's about to change. Winter will be here shortly. Remember, you read it here first.

[gowlerk 2,253]

1 minute ago, markharju said:

That's about to change. Winter will be here shortly. Remember, you read it here first.

I don’t recall you being correct about any other prediction in the past. And I don’t think this is going to do anything to change that record.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

40 minutes ago, airdvr said:

Prices are on the rise however.  I've noticed it with food and with my builders.  Mostly wood for framing.  From one of my builders to one of my clients building a new home...

Additionally, I want you to remember that the pricing I've given you right now is based on today's (or a month ago's) lumber pricing. There's about $50,000 worth of lumber in your house right now. A similar house we built last year but with a large 3 car garage was $8,000 less for lumber. 

Could fix that with lowering duties on Canadian lumber.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

19 minutes ago, markharju said:

That's about to change. Winter will be here shortly. Remember, you read it here first.

How will the coming winter change the demand for peat moss?

Or have any abnormal effect on the supply chain?

Big snowstorms have the ability to slow stuff down, or even stop it for a few days.  But that's not unusual. 

I'm getting ready for winter, but that primarily consists of adding warm clothes, a bit of extra food and some handwarmers to my gear bag. 

What, exactly, are you predicting?

[billvon 3,080]

13 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

What, exactly, are you predicting?

The Boogaloo, of course.  It's all the rage.  Ron calls it the SHTF.  Others call it the fall of the Deep State.  It is many things to many people - but the one thing in common is a desire to see violence.

[olofscience 489]

30 minutes ago, billvon said:

a desire to see violence.

Markharju, desiring to see violence? I did NOT see that coming, no sir.

<surprised_pikachu.jpg>

[Westerly 61]

18 hours ago, yoink said:

You keep saying this. 

Do you understand that NO vaccine is ready for mass production now? And won't be for at least 8-10 months?

 

Simply buying and getting the equipment made and delivered that is required for the manufacturing process is a 5-6 month lead time.

 

I suggest you come up with a new short term plan.

There are already vaccines in mass production at this moment. Pfizer has hundreds of thousands of doses already made and available for use. I know that getting a vaccine to everyone wont happen overnight or this year. However, for every day we spend messing around, that entire plan gets pushed to the right by one day. So instead of getting everything ready by say March, now it's April, or May, and on and on. Some manufacturers are skipping ahead and starting the production process now in hopes the FDA will approve their product, but others are not. They are waiting, and waiting costs lives. If the FDA said okay, you can start administering your product today, I guarantee you those timelines will suddenly become shorter because now the pharmaceuticals have a reason to get moving.

Regarding the lead time on the equipment, anything can be expedited. I have seen 10-story buildings built in 3 months because they were built under the premise of 'I dont care how much it costs, whoever can get it done fastest gets the contract'. You'd be amazed how fast equipment and tools can be procured when you write a blank check.

[wmw999 2,551]

When schedule is the strongly primary driver, quality tends to get thrown out, simply because it takes research. In the case of buildings, as well as vaccines, the downside to shitty quality is pretty high. There have to be some serious constraints on what corners can be cut in the interest of schedule.

Wendy P.

[Westerly 61]

In the case of the FULL LOCKDOWN!!!!!! no one has actually done such a thing in the USA. The so called lockdowns were barely even so. Half the businesses out there were 'essential' including your local Jiffy Lube. People still went out for various reasons. The lockdowns werent THAT restrictive. 

Edited November 2, 2020 by Westerly

[Guest]

3 hours ago, gowlerk said:

I don’t recall you being correct about any other prediction in the past. And I don’t think this is going to do anything to change that record.

Too easy https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/266034-irgc-the-head-of-the-snake/?tab=comments#comment-4860063

[Phil1111 1,149]

4 hours ago, airdvr said:

Prices are on the rise however.  I've noticed it with food and with my builders.  Mostly wood for framing.  From one of my builders to one of my clients building a new home...

Additionally, I want you to remember that the pricing I've given you right now is based on today's (or a month ago's) lumber pricing. There's about $50,000 worth of lumber in your house right now. A similar house we built last year but with a large 3 car garage was $8,000 less for lumber. 

Once again a known trump supporter has complained about a trump screw-up. Thats cost him and his industry money. When trump caused the problem in the first place. If only facts, education could supersede trumps lies and ignorance.

Canadians love you all for that: Canfor Corp. says its net profit surged in the third quarter on record lumber earnings that were driven by an unprecedented increase in prices. Adjusted net income increased to $259.4 million or $2.07 per share, up from a loss of $42.6 million or 34 cents per share in the third quarter of 2019."

"With lumber prices rising sharply, the National Association of Home Builders wants the Trump administration to take steps to halt or reverse the costly trend.

In an Aug. 7 letter, NAHB called on President Trump to push U.S. lumber producers to boost production and also to work toward a new trade agreement with Canada to end current tariffs on lumber imports to the U.S. Those tariffs now are about 20%, according to U.S. and Canadian industry officials.

NAHB says lumber shortages have developed and prices have shot up by 80% since the middle of April, due partly to increased demand for housing construction and more interest from do-it-yourselfers seeking to make home improvements during the pandemic."

So even with tariffs Canadian lumber producers are raking in record profits. Canadians give thanks to trumps stupidity with every saw cut in a fresh log.

Edited November 2, 2020 by Phil1111

[airdvr 210]

11 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

NAHB says lumber shortages have developed and prices have shot up by 80% since the middle of April, due partly to increased demand for housing construction and more interest from do-it-yourselfers seeking to make home improvements during the pandemic."

The letter also asks the president to push domestic lumber producers to increase production and asks that he re-visit his agreement with Canada.  I'm not seeing anyone say Trump caused the problem.

[Phil1111 1,149]

1 minute ago, airdvr said:

The letter also asks the president to push domestic lumber producers to increase production and asks that he re-visit his agreement with Canada.  I'm not seeing anyone say Trump caused the problem.

So a 20% increase in lumber prices because of tariffs doesn't matter to you or your clients? This may help your understanding on how tariffs work and the nature of the joke that I enclosed at your expense. Sorry about that but you make it too easy.

Here’s why US importers and consumers pay Trump’s tariffs, not China

Trump's tariffs are producing billions, but China isn't paying

Perhaps thinking of US lumber importers as trump's foot may help. Read the links above for further clarification on why the US National Association of Home Builders is against said tariffs.

[billvon 3,080]

12 minutes ago, Westerly said:

Regarding the lead time on the equipment, anything can be expedited. I have seen 10-story buildings built in 3 months because they were built under the premise of 'I dont care how much it costs, whoever can get it done fastest gets the contract'. You'd be amazed how fast equipment and tools can be procured when you write a blank check.

You can't get nine women to make a baby in a month.  And that's true of many of the long poles in vaccine development/testing as well.  You can surely ramp up production facilities and stage everything from reactors to human cultures to syringes - but you can't look at a year's worth of side effects by looking at twelve people for a month.

The huge risk to this is that a vaccine looks somewhat good in a trial (say it's 50% effective) and so the government says "GO!  Better than nothing!" - and then three months later 2% of the people using it have an autoimmune reaction that leads to kidney failure.  Not only do you then have a lot of people with kidney failure, but there's no way the rest of the population is going to be OK with the NEXT vaccine, even if you say "THIS one doesn't have any problems - I promise!"

[kallend 2,112]

4 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

What, exactly, are you predicting?

He predicted that winter is coming and wants us to remember that we heard it here first.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

1 minute ago, kallend said:

He predicted that winter is coming and wants us to remember that we heard it here first.

Ahhhhh. 

Gotcha. 
Thanks.

[billvon 3,080]

35 minutes ago, Westerly said:

In the case of the FULL LOCKDOWN!!!!!! no one has actually done such a thing in the USA. 

You can't have full lockdowns - people would starve.  Still, the first lockdown was fairly effective.  Mobility (as measured by mobile phone tracking data) went down by over 50% in April of this year.  And it worked; cases declined precipitously.  

Needless to say that's not the best way to do it.  Masking/tracing/social distancing/testing is a better way.  But fortunately or unfortunately, lockdowns do work when they are implemented in the US.

[kallend 2,112]

1 minute ago, billvon said:

You can't have full lockdowns - people would starve.  Still, the first lockdown was fairly effective.  Mobility (as measured by mobile phone tracking data) went down by over 50% in April of this year.  And it worked; cases declined precipitously.  

Needless to say that's not the best way to do it.  Masking/tracing/social distancing/testing is a better way. 

Not when some 35% of the population is so stupid they refuse to do it.

[Phil1111 1,149]

20 minutes ago, kallend said:

Not when some 35% of the population is so stupid they refuse to do it.

"In this Sept. 23, 2020 Christ Church members and guests sing in protest of a city public-health order intentionally not wearing masks outside City Hall in Moscow, Idaho. Moments after hearing their regional hospital was overwhelmed by COVID-19 patients and looking at sending people as far away as Seattle for care, members of Idaho's northernmost health department board voted to repeal the local mask mandate."

Praise the lord and pass the covid.

[Westerly 61]

47 minutes ago, billvon said:

 

The huge risk to this is that a vaccine looks somewhat good in a trial (say it's 50% effective) and so the government says "GO!  Better than nothing!" - and then three months later 2% of the people using it have an autoimmune reaction that leads to kidney failure.  Not only do you then have a lot of people with kidney failure, but there's no way the rest of the population is going to be OK with the NEXT vaccine, even if you say "THIS one doesn't have any problems - I promise!"

Yes, there is a risk, which is why this is called a risk acescent. There is some possibility that something bad could happen if the vaccine is released early. However, there is an absolute 100% possibility that something bad will happen if it is not released early (i.e. lots of people die who otherwise wouldn't have). So what sounds worse, 2% of the users possibly suffering from kidney failure, or another 100,000 people who we absolutely, positively know will die without a vaccine?
 

Edited November 2, 2020 by Westerly

[olofscience 489]

7 minutes ago, Westerly said:

Yes, there is a risk, which is why this is called a risk acescent. There is some possibility that something bad could happen if the vaccine is released early. However, there is an absolute 100% possibility that something bad will happen if it is not released early (i.e. lots of people die who otherwise wouldn't have). So what sounds worse, 2% of the users possibly suffering from kidney failure, or another 100,000 people who we absolutely, positively know will die without a vaccine?
 

If you give that hypothetical vaccine with 2% kidney failure rate to 5 million people, then yes you'll have to choose between 100,000 people dying from covid and 100,000 people dying of kidney failure.

The US has population of 350 million.

Look, everyone, myself included, is absolutely desperate for a vaccine. But it still should be done properly and corners can't be cut.

Edit: and your "2% possibly vs 100,000 positively" comparison isn't how probability works - the rate is already rolled into the total probability, so 2% will positively and definitely get those consequences (that the 2% probability defined in the first place).

Edited November 2, 2020 by olofscience

[JoeWeber 2,840]

6 hours ago, gowlerk said:

The supply chain seems to be doing fine just like Joe said. I’ll be delivering an urgently needed important load of peat moss to a greenhouse today. The only problem I see these days is an over supply of capacity because demand is down somewhat.

That's just outrageous! What about good old American Peat Moss? Goddamn Nafta!