Lloyd's a billionaire and Senior Chairman at Goldman Sachs. He could easily employ a team of actuaries, biostatisticians, economists, epidemiologists, hospitalists, infectologists, and statisticians to price out various cost/benefit scenarios.

But he won't, because...
/1 https://twitter.com/lloydblankfein/status/1241907502662418437
...the economic numbers blow up. Let's do a thought experiment. Assume:

(a) we still do enough social distancing to reduce infection rates by a whopping 75%;

(b) only 20% of infected people need health care services, and only 30% of those need an ICU.

What happens then?
/2
The healthcare system collapses. Consider this article in the NEJM today: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsb2005114?query=featured_coronavirus

What I described above is the "severe" scenario. We'd have 3,840,000 patients needing to use 85,000 ICU beds, 160,000 ventilators, and 25,000 respiratory therapists (per shift).
/3
The healthcare system collapses. Consider this article in the NEJM today: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsb2005114?query=featured_coronavirusWhat I described above is the "severe" scenario. We'd have 3,840,000 patients needing to use 85,000 ICU beds, 160,000 ventilators, and 25,000 respiratory therapists (per shift)./3
The healthcare system collapses. Consider this article in the NEJM today: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsb2005114?query=featured_coronavirusWhat I described above is the "severe" scenario. We'd have 3,840,000 patients needing to use 85,000 ICU beds, 160,000 ventilators, and 25,000 respiratory therapists (per shift)./3
"Restart the economy" people could do the math on "what does it cost the economy if over 3 million people need intensive care but can't get it?" but, of course, they won't, because using any reasonable value of a statistical life (VSL) puts that cost well into the trillions.
/4
So if we follow Lloyd's advice we're already at *trillions* of dollars in damage, and that's with the rosy assumption we cut the infection rate by 75% and only 6% of infections need intensive care—and that's looking at just the ICU issue, and not issues like downstream effects./5
So if we follow Lloyd's advice we're already at *trillions* of dollars in damage, and that's with the rosy assumption we cut the infection rate by 75% and only 6% of infections need intensive care—and that's looking at just the ICU issue, and not issues like downstream effects./5
So if we follow Lloyd's advice we're already at *trillions* of dollars in damage, and that's with the rosy assumption we cut the infection rate by 75% and only 6% of infections need intensive care—and that's looking at just the ICU issue, and not issues like downstream effects./5
So if we follow Lloyd's advice we're already at *trillions* of dollars in damage, and that's with the rosy assumption we cut the infection rate by 75% and only 6% of infections need intensive care—and that's looking at just the ICU issue, and not issues like downstream effects./5
In short, "restart the economy" is not just callous and cruel, it is bad economics. It is another form of the dangerously wrong assumption that Covid-19 is like the flu. It is not. It is tsunami of pneumonia, respiratory failure, and death.

/end
Like I said in the thread above: anyone making the economic argument to do less needs to show some math. A 75% reduction in the infection rate of Covid-19 still means >3 million people need intensive care but won't get it. What's the economic cost of that? https://twitter.com/matthewjdowd/status/1242199425432408064?s=19
Every one of these "restart the economy" arguments is based on a completely unrealistic estimate about the prevalence and severity of COVID-19.

It's like saying "the county fair must go on!" while a tornado is approaching. The damage would be massive. https://twitter.com/MaxKennerly/status/1242469716473585664
Nope, because pricing the "cost" of "over 1 million dead, over 3 million needing critical care but not getting it, over 20% of cops, firefighters, teachers, nurses, and doctors sickened" produces figures with far more zeros than a partial work stoppage. https://twitter.com/JustinWolfers/status/1242423482387968000
"I don't know" is outrageous. If he really didn't know, then, like Lloyd Blankfein, he could make a few phone calls and have a team of experts model scenarios.

Truth is, he knows the numbers are so insanely bad that they're not worth running. He's lying. https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1242852543513821185
Hey, look here, some real economists ran "but the economy!" numbers and... big surprise, letting a pandemic spread unabated is not good for the economy.

Who could've guessed, other than literally everyone with a brain. https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1243568471637663746
Ah, now it's "health versus health." Okay, @SecAzar, show us your estimates. Let us see the trade-offs here.

But the "re-open the economy" people never have any estimates or analyses. They know the numbers don't work without ludicrous assumptions. https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1262017350280400903
You can follow @MaxKennerly.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:
There are a lot of misconceptions about the Turkish diaspora in Germany. Since i just finished writing an essay about this topic I thought it's time to give other people
Read more
Las mejores calculadoras online en 2020A thread http://totumat.com/2020/11/26/las-mejores-calculadoras-online-en-2020/ Cuando se estudian asignaturas que requieren de cálculos complicados, nada mejor que contar con una buena calculadora.
Read more
Mitigating #ClimateChange is as much about taking up new techs as about leaving others behindMost studies focus on #coal's global downfall but another #energy tech decline is loomingRead my new
Read more