Coronavirus Covid-19 - opšta tema

[omiljeni]

Jutros Iran imao preko 4500 novih, što bi im bio apsolutni maksimum. (do sada je to 3186)

Sad ispravljeno na 2000 i smanjen broj umrlih sa 130 na 120.

Objašnjenje: Earlier, Iran's Ministry of Health incorrectly reported a much higher figure for the number of new cases and deaths. The Minister later acknowledged the mistake

dodatno objašnjenje: The total number of patients on the Ministry of Health's website was incorrectly typed, which was corrected.

 

Kod mnogo država su statsi veoma čudni^TM, ali Iran je tu ubedljivo najluđi, bar od svih ovih velikih sa dosta zaraženih i dosta urađenih testova.

Oni su na početku nabili CFR skoro na 30% jer su prijavljivali samo umrle, a zaražene nisu uopšte. Pa su onda taj CFR u 2 nedelje oborili na ispod 0,5% što je bilo posebno ludilo, a sad opet dolaze na 6% i raste.

I onda imaju situaciju pogrešno ministarstvo utipkalo brojeve.

[theanswer]

Ako zanemariš tu grešku, br slučajeva u Iranu je u opadanju, sad je već u trendu na dole.. Sa oko 3k na oko 2,5k sad je već oko 2k...

[Gojko & Stojko]

1 hour ago, Budja said:

 

Mislim da Klinton nije bas dobar izbor za ilustraciju oko finansijske krize. Repeal of Glass-Steagall act i tako to. Bil se u citatu prilicno folira.

Odgovorio sam ti u spojleru

 

Spoiler

Meni ne izgleda da se folira, ja sam tu preneo samo jednu rečenicu sa kraja odeljka u kome on priča o glavnim zamerkama za uticaju na ekonomiju dok je bio predesdnik, evo ga čitav deo dole. Na starom forumu sam se u realno vreme raspravljao o ovome u detalje,sada nije toliko aktuelno.

 

Mislim, niko nije otkrio toplu vodu tvrdeći da su poslednja dva demokratska predsednika daleko bolja u apsolutno svemu od poslednja dva republikanska, ali

ovoliko detalja i sposobnost koncentracije prosto bodu oči:

 

One thing that thrived during Clinton’s presidency, the economy, has wilted of late. The economic boom of the 1990s created nearly 23 million new jobs during his eight years, but today, the economy is shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs a month. While this has stoked nostalgia for the prosperity of the Clinton era, it has also focused new scrutiny on his record. What role did Clinton’s policies play in creating the conditions that led to the Great Recession?

When the subject came up during our conversation in Chappaqua, Clinton calmly dissected the case against him and acknowledged that in at least some particulars his critics have a point. In almost clinical form, as if back at Oxford as a Rhodes scholar, he broke down the case against him into three allegations: first, that he used the Community Reinvestment Act to force small banks into making loans to low-income depositors who were too risky. Second, that he signed the deregulatory Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999, repealing part of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act that prohibited commercial banks from engaging in the investment business. And third, that he failed to regulate the complex financial instruments known as derivatives.

The first complaint Clinton rejects as “just a totally off-the-wall crazy argument” made by the “right wing,” noting that community banks have not had major problems. The second he gives some credence to, although he blames Bush for, in his view, neutering the Securities and Exchange Commission. “Letting banks take investment positions I don’t think had much to do with this meltdown,” he said. “And the more diversified institutions in general were better able to handle what happened. And again, if I had known that the S.E.C. would have taken a rain check, would I have done it? Probably not. But I wouldn’t have done anything. In other words, I would have tried to reverse everything if I had known we were going to have eight years where we would not have an S.E.C. for most of the time.”

Clinton argued that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act set up a framework for overseeing the industry. “So I don’t think that’s such a good criticism,” he said. “I think, actually, if you want to make a criticism on that, it would be an indirect one — you could say that the signing of that legislation sped up what was happening anyway and maybe led some of these institutions to be bigger than they otherwise would have been and the very bigness of some of these groups caused some of this problem because the bigger something is and the newer it is, the harder it is to manage. And I do think there were some serious management problems which might not have occurred.”

Then there are the derivatives. There, Clinton pleads guilty. Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman, opposed regulation of derivatives as they came to the fore in the 1990s, and Clinton agreed. “They argued that nobody’s going to buy these derivatives, we’ll do it without transparency, they’ll get the information they need,” he recalled. “And it turned out to be just wrong; it just wasn’t true.” He said others share blame, including credit-rating agencies that underestimated the risk. But he accepts responsibility as well. “I very much wish now that I had demanded that we put derivatives under the jurisdiction of the Securities and Exchange Commission and that transparency rules had been observed and that we had done that. That I think is a legitimate criticism of what we didn’t do.” He added: “If you ask me to write the indictment, I’d say: ‘I wish Bill Clinton had said more about derivatives. The Republicans probably would have stopped him from doing it, but at least he should have sounded the alarm bell.’ ”

For all that, Clinton insisted he never would have let the housing bubble grow into the problem it became (never mind the high-technology bubble that burst on his watch) and would have stepped in if he were president to prevent the free fall. “When anybody asks me that,” he told me, “I ask them, I look at them and ask them: ‘Do you think this would have happened if we had been there? Look me in the face and say yes.’ I haven’t found any takers yet.”

 

SaE

[Tolaa]

1 hour ago, Orle Zmajević said:

 

Moje info su sa worldmeter koji za source uzima upravo taj Folkstagod.

Jesu i ovi danasnji podaci pogresni :

726 new cases and 96 new deaths in Sweden [source]

Pa daju link na isti sajt koji sam ja dala, ali pišu drugačije brojeve nego što sajt pokazuje: 660 novih od juče u 11.30 do danas u 11.30. 

 

30 minutes ago, Orle Zmajević said:

 

 

 

Gde su ovde tih 660 ?

 

Ne znam Svedski, pa sam pitao za pojasnjenje. Vidim brojke i chartove na Worldometer pa mi ne deluje da pada broj bilo cega, ali evo dopusticu ti da objasnis.

To je tih 660, koji su danas objavljeni za 24h od juče do danas u 11.30. Ovog broja od 726 nema nigde. Sredinom nedelje su do sada uvek skakali brojevi zbog nekih kašnjenja od vikenda, ali i pored toga je ovo prvi skok nakon pada od nekoliko dana. 
 

Takodje je i broj umrlih pogrešan, do juče je bilo 611, do danas 687, znači 76 novih, ne 96.

 

I ako bi mogao da prestaneš da od mene tražiš objašnjenja zašto su brojevi takvi kakvi su, bilo bi lepo. Ja niti sam birala strategiju, niti imam ikakvog uticaja na to kakva će sutuacija biti, osim što sedim kod kuće. Nas par koji živimo ovde smo se javili da prenesemo kakav je način razmišljanja, i da se mnogo više oko Švedske drami van nje nego u njoj. 

 

Takodje, ne znam zašto bi brojevi obolelih u Švedskoj bili čudni kad je švedska strategija da virus prodje kroz što više ljudi, ali ne istovremeno, već u meri da ne optereti zdravstveni sistem do granice pucanja. Za sada nije došlo do toga. Predvidjanja od prošle i pretprošle nedelje su bila da će ove nedelje biti mnogo veći broj obolelih, ali se to nije desilo. Predvidjanje za peak je za 3 nedelje, tako da je porast očekivan.
 

Što se tiče broja mrtvih, da, svaki broj veći od 0 je prevelik, tu nemam šta drugo da kažem.

 

Posledice svega ovoga će se moći objektivno meriti tek nakon što se budu videle posledice po zdravlje (pre svega psihičko) ljudi koji su držani zatvoreni mesecima. Da ne pričam o očajnicima koji će izgubiti poslove, a država neće imati odakle da im isplaćuje čak ni socijalu. Nadam se da grešim, ali ti brojevi će da budu mnogo gori od najgorih švedskih brojeva.

[Kampokei]

Ove švedske mere, ili odsustvo istih, se možda i malo mistifikuju. Svako malo neki članak "da li su švedske mere zapravo pravi odgovor?". A znamo da bi van skandinavskih društava one verovatno proizvele katastrofu (koja je za sada izostala u Švedskoj). Drugo, po izveštavanjima nešvedskih medija bi se reklo da tamo život teče skoro sasvim normalno. Ni blizu, ljudi uglavnom rade od kuće, ulice su uglavnom prazne, a ljudi se svakako ne ljube i ne rukuju bila korona ili ne. Najveća je razlika što rade vrtići i osnovne škole. 

[Orle Zmajević]

De ne drami, niko od tebe nije trazio da objasnis zasto su brojevi takvi  kakvi jesu nego da objasnis metodologiju brojanja ako je vec drugacija od one sa worldmeter, posto je izvor na Svedskom jeziku.

[Budja]

35 minutes ago, Gojko & Stojko said:

Odgovorio sam ti u spojleru

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Meni ne izgleda da se folira, ja sam tu preneo samo jednu rečenicu sa kraja odeljka u kome on priča o glavnim zamerkama za uticaju na ekonomiju dok je bio predesdnik, evo ga čitav deo dole. Na starom forumu sam se u realno vreme raspravljao o ovome u detalje,sada nije toliko aktuelno.

 

Mislim, niko nije otkrio toplu vodu tvrdeći da su poslednja dva demokratska predsednika daleko bolja u apsolutno svemu od poslednja dva republikanska, ali

ovoliko detalja i sposobnost koncentracije prosto bodu oči:

 

One thing that thrived during Clinton’s presidency, the economy, has wilted of late. The economic boom of the 1990s created nearly 23 million new jobs during his eight years, but today, the economy is shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs a month. While this has stoked nostalgia for the prosperity of the Clinton era, it has also focused new scrutiny on his record. What role did Clinton’s policies play in creating the conditions that led to the Great Recession?

When the subject came up during our conversation in Chappaqua, Clinton calmly dissected the case against him and acknowledged that in at least some particulars his critics have a point. In almost clinical form, as if back at Oxford as a Rhodes scholar, he broke down the case against him into three allegations: first, that he used the Community Reinvestment Act to force small banks into making loans to low-income depositors who were too risky. Second, that he signed the deregulatory Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999, repealing part of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act that prohibited commercial banks from engaging in the investment business. And third, that he failed to regulate the complex financial instruments known as derivatives.

The first complaint Clinton rejects as “just a totally off-the-wall crazy argument” made by the “right wing,” noting that community banks have not had major problems. The second he gives some credence to, although he blames Bush for, in his view, neutering the Securities and Exchange Commission. “Letting banks take investment positions I don’t think had much to do with this meltdown,” he said. “And the more diversified institutions in general were better able to handle what happened. And again, if I had known that the S.E.C. would have taken a rain check, would I have done it? Probably not. But I wouldn’t have done anything. In other words, I would have tried to reverse everything if I had known we were going to have eight years where we would not have an S.E.C. for most of the time.”

Clinton argued that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act set up a framework for overseeing the industry. “So I don’t think that’s such a good criticism,” he said. “I think, actually, if you want to make a criticism on that, it would be an indirect one — you could say that the signing of that legislation sped up what was happening anyway and maybe led some of these institutions to be bigger than they otherwise would have been and the very bigness of some of these groups caused some of this problem because the bigger something is and the newer it is, the harder it is to manage. And I do think there were some serious management problems which might not have occurred.”

Then there are the derivatives. There, Clinton pleads guilty. Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman, opposed regulation of derivatives as they came to the fore in the 1990s, and Clinton agreed. “They argued that nobody’s going to buy these derivatives, we’ll do it without transparency, they’ll get the information they need,” he recalled. “And it turned out to be just wrong; it just wasn’t true.” He said others share blame, including credit-rating agencies that underestimated the risk. But he accepts responsibility as well. “I very much wish now that I had demanded that we put derivatives under the jurisdiction of the Securities and Exchange Commission and that transparency rules had been observed and that we had done that. That I think is a legitimate criticism of what we didn’t do.” He added: “If you ask me to write the indictment, I’d say: ‘I wish Bill Clinton had said more about derivatives. The Republicans probably would have stopped him from doing it, but at least he should have sounded the alarm bell.’ ”

For all that, Clinton insisted he never would have let the housing bubble grow into the problem it became (never mind the high-technology bubble that burst on his watch) and would have stepped in if he were president to prevent the free fall. “When anybody asks me that,” he told me, “I ask them, I look at them and ask them: ‘Do you think this would have happened if we had been there? Look me in the face and say yes.’ I haven’t found any takers yet.”

 

SaE

 

Meni vise lici kao ex-post "nisam ja", nego razumna odbrana citiranog. Nema nista u ovom odlomku sto nam govori da bi se Bili ponasa drugacije. Naprotiv, on diskutuje sa stavovima da su njegove politike u devedestim doprinele krizi u 2008. Ali da ne idemo vise u digresiju...

[cedo]

2 minutes ago, Kampokei said:

Ove švedske mere, ili odsustvo istih, se možda i malo mistifikuju. Svako malo neki članak "da li su švedske mere zapravo pravi odgovor?". A znamo da bi van skandinavskih društava one verovatno proizvele katastrofu (koja je za sada izostala u Švedskoj). Drugo, po izveštavanjima nešvedskih medija bi se reklo da tamo život teče skoro sasvim normalno. Ni blizu, ljudi uglavnom rade od kuće, ulice su uglavnom prazne, a ljudi se svakako ne ljube i ne rukuju bila korona ili ne. Najveća je razlika što rade vrtići i osnovne škole. 

 

Mozda svedska i dobro prolazi, ali ako pogledamo ovu listu sortiranu po broju umrlih u procentima (na milion stanovnika) vidimo da oni koji su, vise ili manje, zagovarali krdo su prilicno visoko, pri tom nisu u silaznoj putanji. 

Zanemarimo male drzave i izdvojimo epicentre (spanija italija ... verovatno i svajcarska sa svojom naslonjenoscu), oni su sada vec na silaznoj putanji.

Osim onih koji su zagovarali krdo, tu su jos francuska i belgija.

 

 

[Tolaa]

19 minutes ago, Orle Zmajević said:

De ne drami, niko od tebe nije trazio da objasnis zasto su brojevi takvi  kakvi jesu nego da objasnis metodologiju brojanja ako je vec drugacija od one sa worldmeter, posto je izvor na Svedskom jeziku.

Vidim sad da je ono “dopustiću ti da objasniš” upućeno drugom korisniku (bila sam citirana u istom postu, pa sam mislila da je meni), ali svejedno je bezvezan način ophodjenja, što bi nekom trebalo tvoje dopuštenje, ili što bi neko morao tebi nešto da objašnjava. 

[Orle Zmajević]

2 minutes ago, Tolaa said:

Vidim sad da je ono “dopustiću ti da objasniš” upućeno drugom korisniku (bila sam citirana u istom postu, pa sam mislila da je meni), ali svejedno je bezvezan način ophodjenja, što bi nekom trebalo tvoje dopuštenje, ili što bi neko morao tebi nešto da objašnjava. 

 

Zbog toga sto je taj korisnik odgovorio na moje pitanje tebi, uz opasku da ne citam link koji sam postovao a koji je na Svedskom jeziku.

[Tolaa]

37 minutes ago, Kampokei said:

Ove švedske mere, ili odsustvo istih, se možda i malo mistifikuju. Svako malo neki članak "da li su švedske mere zapravo pravi odgovor?". A znamo da bi van skandinavskih društava one verovatno proizvele katastrofu (koja je za sada izostala u Švedskoj). Drugo, po izveštavanjima nešvedskih medija bi se reklo da tamo život teče skoro sasvim normalno. Ni blizu, ljudi uglavnom rade od kuće, ulice su uglavnom prazne, a ljudi se svakako ne ljube i ne rukuju bila korona ili ne. Najveća je razlika što rade vrtići i osnovne škole. 

Apsolutno. A ti otvoreni vrtići i osnovne škole za sada nisu izazvali nikakvu katastrofu. Naprotiv, roditelji koji rade u zdravstvu a koji ostaju kod kuće sa zdravom decom bi izazvali mnogo veći haos.

 

Deca koja pokazuju i najmanje simptome prehlade se ne šalju u škole ili vrtiće. To je neki princip ovde čak i kad nije bilo korone, da se ne širi, a sad pogotovo, šalju decu kući čim se nakašlju. Takodje, odrasli ostaju kod kuće kad su prehladjeni, isto princip koji oduvek važi. Nije kao u Srbiji da moraš da otvaraš bolovanje ako si bolestan duže od jednog dana, pa ljudi dolaze na posao mrtvi prehladjeni, već lepo imaš pravo 8 dana da budeš kod kuće a da samo nazoveš i kažeš da si bolestan, nikakav lekar i otvaranje bolovanja nisu potrebni. Jednostavno nikom nije u cilju da se svi na poslu razbole. Sad za vreme korone su to povećali na 21 dan (za one koji ne mogu da rade od kuće, a svi koji mogu, rade od kuće kad su zdravi).

Edited April 8, 2020 by Tolaa

[duda]

Šta je ovo sa Rusijom ?

Reklo bi se da ubrzava ?

Mada su to ipak male brojke za onoliku zemlju.

 

Juče mi prijateljica koja živi u Trevisu rekla da je kod njih u gradu zaraženih cca 2000 ( ni 90000 stanovnika).

Ali kaže da mnogo testiraju i posledično, navodno drže stvar pod kontrolom.

[Budja]

1 hour ago, TdEII said:

 

Tolaa je dala za 2, 3, 4, 5 i 6. april, respektivno.

 

Worldometer != ovaj svedski sajt.

 

Nemam pojma zasto.

[Milosh76]

I u Hrvatskoj ima budala...

 

Pošta u zagrebačkom naselju Zapruđu je zatvorena nakon što je u sredu prepodne u nju ušla žena pozitivna na koronavirus.

Žena je došla da pošalje lekarsku dokumentaciju, a kad je sve obavila prisutne je obavestila da je zaražena.

 

"Oko 9.15 na Trgu Ivana Meštrovića žena koja je bila zaražena koronavirusom i bila u samoizolaciji je došla u poštu, obavila šta treba i onda javno rekla pred svima da ima koronu i da dezinfikuju poštu. Mi smo nakon toga zatvorili poslovnicu, pričekali epidemiologa, popisali sve ljude koji su bili unutra i dalje postupamo po uputstvima", kazao je za RTL Valentino Rajković, zapovednik Civilne zaštite Novi Zagreb.

 

"Kad dezinfikujemo poštu, epidemiolozi će videti šta će sa ljudima koji su bili unutra i da li će ih testirati ili ne", dodao je.

Iz Hrvatske pošte rekli su da je iz preventivnih razloga zatvorena ta poštanska filijala, obaveštena su nadležna tela i postupiće se u skladu sa uputstvima civilnog štaba. Proverava se cela porodica zaražene žene, a kako nezvanično saznaje RTL, svi su pozitivni na koronavirus.

[Orle Zmajević]

Italija  3836/542

UK       5491/938