Coronavirus - A pale horse,4 men and ....beer

[Derek27]

Straw man argument.

I have been very clear that I believe that Covid is real.

But if painting people who disagree with you as being crazy conspiracy theorists who believe in the lizard people and who think that we are living in the Matrix, hey, whatever makes you feel good.

I'm not talking about people who believe what I believe but people who actually work in care and NHS and see first hand what's going on, as opposed to living in fantasy land and guessing that everything's a conspiracy!

You have the same attitude as Alex in that it's all about what you believe rather than what you see or have evidence/reason to believe.

I didn't say you didn't - I said you think "it's all about what you believe rather than what you see or have evidence/reason to believe", which is why you misunderstood my post.

People who believe the vaccine contains a mind-controlling microchip designed by Bill Gates are crazy, end off!

[SweetLyrics]

Yes, but that's hardly relevant to this discussion, as no-one here believes that's what's happening (correct me if I'm wrong).

However, there are Covid sceptics in the forum - people who look at the official narratives with a critical eye, without denying that Covid is real - and I count myself amongst them.

People who believe the vaccine contains a mind-controlling microchip designed by Bill Gates are crazy, end off!

[Derek27]

I will defer to your superior academic expertise on the quality of the abstract (although when I did my MSc, I'm pretty sure that I was told that I didn't need to get bogged down in definitions in my abstract).

It's a shame the professors didn't consult you before publishing their paper.

I was referring to your post, not the paper. Do you seriously expect me to read every scientific report posted to this forum? I shouldn't even be on this forum, I should be trading. But if that's a summary of the report it's quite a poor one.

It doesn't take any academic expertise to say something is meaningless. I'm sure you've encountered the odd university research project costing £10K only to find something blindingly obvious, like people who eat at McDonald's are overweight. Sometimes you need to rely on common sense rather than research. Do you really need a scientific paper to tell you staying at home reduces the risk of catching/spreading the virus?

[Derek27]

Yes, but that's hardly relevant to this discussion, as no-one here believes that's what's happening (correct me if I'm wrong).

However, there are Covid sceptics in the forum - people who look at the official narratives with a critical eye, without denying that Covid is real - and I count myself amongst them.

People who believe the vaccine contains a mind-controlling microchip designed by Bill Gates are crazy, end off!

I certainly will correct you for being wrong - Alex does!

I just wonder if trading pre-off will be easier after all the pro traders who take the vaccine become mind controlled by Bill Gates, or if everything will even out with less liquidity overall

I think that most traders on here are pretending that the virus is real and the vaccine is a good thing in hope that other traders take it, so that when Bill Gates flicks a switch on his control panel they then have a bigger share of the market whilst those vaccinated big players have been mind controlled into mining lithium for electric car batteries instead

[SweetLyrics]

Sometimes you need to rely on common sense rather than research. Do you really need a scientific paper to tell you staying at home reduces the risk of catching/spreading the virus?

I think that, as so often happens in the markets, it's easy to assume something to be the case, only to apply empirical testing and find out that your assumptions are wrong.

If you think that you are any less subject to cognitive biases than us sceptics, you are kidding yourself.

Jeff

[Derek27]

Sometimes you need to rely on common sense rather than research. Do you really need a scientific paper to tell you staying at home reduces the risk of catching/spreading the virus?

I think that, as so often happens in the markets, it's easy to assume something to be the case, only to apply empirical testing and find out that your assumptions are wrong.

If you think that you are any less subject to cognitive biases than us sceptics, you are kidding yourself.

Jeff

I can assure you Jeff, you're kidding yourself if you think everyone is equally subject to cognitive biases. There are people on here who suffer from loss aversion and think they're doomed if they can't turn it into a profit - there are others who take it in their stride, red-up and move on to the next market.

I'm assuming I can't catch Covid-19 down the pub because I'm not there. Are you seriously telling me my assumption is wrong and it might fly over here to my flat?

[SweetLyrics]

And he was clearly being flippant.

I certainly will correct you for being wrong - Alex does!

[TraderFred]

“ Look around the poker table, if you can’t see the Sucker.... then Jeff must have decided to sit somewhere else “.

Warren Buffett

[SweetLyrics]

Not relevant. We are talking about whether restrictions work (and whether restrictions deliver added benefit beyond a particular point).

And yes, in a pub full of people, you are more likely to catch a virus than if you stay at home. But a year ago, I didn't let the possibility of catching the flu (and possibly spreading it) affect my decision to go to the pub and sink down a cold one or two.

Living your whole life in a bubble is existence, not living - you have to accept a degree of risk.

I'm assuming I can't catch Covid-19 down the pub because I'm not there. Are you seriously telling me my assumption is wrong and it might fly over here to my flat?

[SweetLyrics]

There you go with the d*** like behaviour again!

Are you that rude in real life, or are you quite meek and mild in person?

“ Look around the poker table, if you can’t see the Sucker.... then Jeff must have decided to sit somewhere else “.

Warren Buffett

[Derek27]

And he was clearly being flippant.

I certainly will correct you for being wrong - Alex does!

I've been talking to him longer than you have and I'm pretty sure he's not. There's no way of knowing as he generally ignores questions but he doesn't appear to believe that the virus exists, or if it does it's no worse than flu and the death toll is not significantly greater than usual.

[Derek27]

Not relevant. We are talking about whether restrictions work (and whether restrictions deliver added benefit beyond a particular point).

And yes, in a pub full of people, you are more likely to catch a virus than if you stay at home. But a year ago, I didn't let the possibility of catching the flu (and possibly spreading it) affect my decision to go to the pub and sink down a cold one or two.

Living your whole life in a bubble is existence, not living - you have to accept a degree of risk.

I'm assuming I can't catch Covid-19 down the pub because I'm not there. Are you seriously telling me my assumption is wrong and it might fly over here to my flat?

You need to stop comparing Covid-19 to the flu and compare it to pneumonia. What you're talking about is irrelevant because Covid-19 wasn't here.

I've had enough of this for now - I'm getting back to trading.

[SweetLyrics]

It's a question of degree.

Both diseases are contagious and can kill.

At what point do you decide a disease is serious enough to shut down society?

However you slice it and dice it, it boils down to subjective judgement.

You need to stop comparing Covid-19 to the flu and compare it to pneumonia. What you're talking about is irrelevant because Covid-19 wasn't here.

I've had enough of this for now - I'm getting back to trading.

[Derek27]

It's a question of degree.

Both diseases are contagious and can kill.

At what point do you decide a disease is serious enough to shut down society?

However you slice it and dice it, it boils down to subjective judgement.

You need to stop comparing Covid-19 to the flu and compare it to pneumonia. What you're talking about is irrelevant because Covid-19 wasn't here.

I've had enough of this for now - I'm getting back to trading.

A point well before 80,000 extra deaths. The flu's been around for centuries and we have no choice but to put up with it, but this is a virus that may or may not become permanent. The problem is further compounded by the fact that it affects mainly elderly people and too many young people don't GAF about spreading it as long as they can keep going out.

[SweetLyrics]

So how many deaths are acceptable (bearing mind mind that many thousands of people die of the flu each year)?

A point well before 80,000 extra deaths.