hotair--2020-04-23--Cuomo: Antibody study shows 21.2% of New York City has been infected, nearly 14% statewide; <span cl

Cuomo: Antibody study shows 21.2% of New York City has been infected, nearly 14% statewide; Update: Too high?

I hope this is reliable .
The antibody studies produced thus far in places like Santa Clara County have been ripped after the fact for their methodology .
What we need to gauge prevalence across the population is a truly random sample , and random samples are hard when you ’ re asking for blood for a study like this .
Logically , people with greater cause to believe they ’ ve been infected ( e.g.
, they had COVID symptoms for a week in March ) will be more willing to volunteer .
Assuming the methodology is sound , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a case of the glass being half full or half empty .
Half full : This is the highest prevalence I ’ ve heard of in any large population .
The antibody tests we ’ ve seen so far in other locations suggest an infection rate of something like four percent but NYC has five times that number .
At 21.2 percent , citywide prevalence would be even higher than it was in that sample of pregnant women taken at an NYC hospital in late March and early April .
( Which isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had three additional weeks to circulate in the city since then . )
Cuomo compared the number of deaths to the new statewide estimate of actual infections based on antibody testing and came up with this : A fatality rate of 0.5 percent , in line with many epidemiologists ’ best estimates .
( Although the question of how many undetected “ excess ” deaths there are from COVID alongside official confirmed deaths lingers . )
For younger people , it ’ s doubtless much smaller than even 0.5 .
This morning , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city ’ s health commissioner said she wouldn ’ t be surprised to learn that one million people in New York City had been infected .
If Cuomo ’ s numbers are right , it ’ s more like 1.8 million .
NYC is further along towards herd immunity than even its own experts believed .
Half empty : It ’ s been a living hell there for the past month and they ’ re still only 30-40 percent of the way towards the prevalence they ’ d need , according to some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That means 20,000+ more deaths to come on top of the 11,000 they ’ ve already suffered before transmission declines .
It also means , in all likelihood , that the Oxford model of the disease is shot .
If the hottest hot spot in the country has “ only ” 21 percent of the population infected , it ’ s ludicrous to think less hard-hit areas might have somehow achieved herd immunity beneath the radar via tens of millions of asymptomatic infections .
According to Cuomo ’ s own data , upstate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just 3.6 percent , in line with the antibody studies we ’ re seeing in places like Santa Clara .
It ’ s a safe bet that NYC will get to herd immunity before anywhere else in the U.S. but they have a long way to go and everywhere else has a really long way to go , including most of New York State .
And remember , all of the chatter about herd immunity involves assuming a best-case scenario in which being infected provides you with antibodies that render you durably immune @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scientists have no idea if that ’ s true yet .
The state randomly tested 3,000 people at grocery stores and shopping locations across 19 counties in 40 localities to see if they had the antibodies to fight the coronavirus , indicating they have had the virus and recovered from it , Cuomo said… The testing results may be skewed because “ these are people who were out and about shopping , ” Cuomo added .
“ They were not people who were in their home , they were not people isolated , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who you could argue probably had a lower rate of infection because they wouldn ’ t come out of the house.
” It ’ s hard to say which way that cuts .
Some people are holed up at home and refusing to visit the grocery store because they haven ’ t had the virus and are terrified of getting it .
Others are holed up at home because they ’ re sick right now and don ’ t want to spread it .
Depending on which group you believe to be bigger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ underestimating the actual number of infections .
I think the number on prevalence in NYC is bad news on balance given our hopes that they ’ d be near herd immunity , but here ’ s some bona fide good news to cheer us up .
There may finally be a ( partial ) solution to America ’ s testing debacle .
If labs no longer need to waste time trying to procure those long swabs to scrape the back of people ’ s throats , they can process more tests more rapidly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ramp up testing .
Trump himself has reportedly been talking up the benefits of testing saliva in his chats with governors lately .
Exit question : What are we going to do about travel to and from New York City at a moment when residents there are , say , eight times more likely to have been infected than in most other parts of the country ?
If prevalence were the same nationwide , we wouldn ’ t need to worry about that .
But with prevalence much higher in some places @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contact between the two or else risk seeding new outbreaks .
What ’ s the strategy for that besides trusting people both inside and outside the city not to travel ?
Update : Hoo boy .
I hope this isn ’ t true .
Twenty-one percent prevalence in NYC is low enough .
Is there reason to believe the true number is actually lower ?

I hope this is reliable. The antibody studies produced thus far in places like Santa Clara County have been ripped after the fact for their methodology. What we need to gauge prevalence across the population is a truly random sample, and random samples are hard when you’re asking for blood for a study like this. Logically, people with greater cause to believe they’ve been infected (e.g., they had COVID symptoms for a week in March) will be more willing to volunteer.
Assuming the methodology is sound, we can look at these numbers as a case of the glass being half full or half empty.
Percent positive by region: Long Island: 16.7%
NYC: 21.2%
Westchester/Rockland: 11.7%
Rest of state: 3.6% (Weighted results) — Andrew Cuomo (@NYGovCuomo) April 23, 2020
Half full: This is the highest prevalence I’ve heard of in any large population. The antibody tests we’ve seen so far in other locations suggest an infection rate of something like four percent but NYC has five times that number. At 21.2 percent, citywide prevalence would be even higher than it was in that sample of pregnant women taken at an NYC hospital in late March and early April. (Which isn’t surprising, as the virus had three additional weeks to circulate in the city since then.) Cuomo compared the number of deaths to the new statewide estimate of actual infections based on antibody testing and came up with this:
If the early results hold, that would mean about 2.7 million people were infected statewide. This means the overall death rate of #coronavirus, at least in New York, may be lower than estimates. Gov. Cuomo notes these are preliminary results https://t.co/y6QWrdVQCK pic.twitter.com/2ZsQFd83Gc — Bloomberg (@business) April 23, 2020
A fatality rate of 0.5 percent, in line with many epidemiologists’ best estimates. (Although the question of how many undetected “excess” deaths there are from COVID alongside official confirmed deaths lingers.) For younger people, it’s doubtless much smaller than even 0.5. This morning, before Cuomo released this data, the city’s health commissioner said she wouldn’t be surprised to learn that one million people in New York City had been infected. If Cuomo’s numbers are right, it’s more like 1.8 million. NYC is further along towards herd immunity than even its own experts believed.
Half empty: It’s been a living hell there for the past month and they’re still only 30-40 percent of the way towards the prevalence they’d need, according to some experts, to reach herd immunity. That means 20,000+ more deaths to come on top of the 11,000 they’ve already suffered before transmission declines. It also means, in all likelihood, that the Oxford model of the disease is shot. If the hottest hot spot in the country has “only” 21 percent of the population infected, it’s ludicrous to think less hard-hit areas might have somehow achieved herd immunity beneath the radar via tens of millions of asymptomatic infections. According to Cuomo’s own data, upstate New York has an infection rate of just 3.6 percent, in line with the antibody studies we’re seeing in places like Santa Clara. It’s a safe bet that NYC will get to herd immunity before anywhere else in the U.S. but they have a long way to go and everywhere else has a really long way to go, including most of New York State.
And remember, all of the chatter about herd immunity involves assuming a best-case scenario in which being infected provides you with antibodies that render you durably immune from all strains of the virus. Scientists have no idea if that’s true yet.
Here’s CNBC describing the study’s methodology:
The state randomly tested 3,000 people at grocery stores and shopping locations across 19 counties in 40 localities to see if they had the antibodies to fight the coronavirus, indicating they have had the virus and recovered from it, Cuomo said… The testing results may be skewed because “these are people who were out and about shopping,” Cuomo added. “They were not people who were in their home, they were not people isolated, they were not people who were quarantined who you could argue probably had a lower rate of infection because they wouldn’t come out of the house.”
It’s hard to say which way that cuts. Some people are holed up at home and refusing to visit the grocery store because they haven’t had the virus and are terrified of getting it. Others are holed up at home because they’re sick right now and don’t want to spread it. Depending on which group you believe to be bigger, the study could be overestimating or underestimating the actual number of infections.
I think the number on prevalence in NYC is bad news on balance given our hopes that they’d be near herd immunity, but here’s some bona fide good news to cheer us up. There may finally be a (partial) solution to America’s testing debacle.
#COVID19 FDA has authorized first saliva test from Rutgers for emergency usehttps://t.co/Yuel4q1gYu — Andy Biotech (@AndyBiotech) April 22, 2020
If labs no longer need to waste time trying to procure those long swabs to scrape the back of people’s throats, they can process more tests more rapidly. That’s what we need to ramp up testing. Trump himself has reportedly been talking up the benefits of testing saliva in his chats with governors lately.
Exit question: What are we going to do about travel to and from New York City at a moment when residents there are, say, eight times more likely to have been infected than in most other parts of the country? If prevalence were the same nationwide, we wouldn’t need to worry about that. But with prevalence much higher in some places than others, we need to limit contact between the two or else risk seeding new outbreaks. What’s the strategy for that besides trusting people both inside and outside the city not to travel?
Update: Hoo boy. I hope this isn’t true. Twenty-one percent prevalence in NYC is low enough. Is there reason to believe the true number is actually lower?


hotair--2020-04-23--Sweden sees big jump in new cases and corrects multiplier of unseen cases

Sweden saw a big jump in the number of confirmed cases today : Sweden has seen its confirmed cases of Covid-19 jump from 16,004 to 16,755 .
The rise was much larger than in recent days , during which Sweden ’ s Public Health Agency had been cautiously celebrating a flattening of cases .
The agency ’ s deputy state epidemiologist Anders Wallensten said the majority of the new cases were in Stockholm .
Increased testing of healthcare workers could be a factor , he said , but scientists were looking into other potential reasons .
The Swedish reporting of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day to day .
If you look at historic charts of the reporting , you can see small plateaus where reporting would drop off for the weekends .
That has made it harder to trust the day to day variation because while the numbers tended to look good on the weekend and even on Monday , there was often a surge midweek as those declines were filled in .
In any case , earlier this week Sweden ’ s public health officials were saying it looked to them as if Sweden had flattened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chief epidemiologist , said the curve was beginning to flatten and had reached a “ plateau ” in many parts of the country , including Stockholm , the centre of the largest outbreak .
The number of daily new Covid-19 infections reached a peak of 726 on April 8 before falling to 332 four days later .
Since then it has inched back up to about 600 new cases a day .
Dr Tegnell said there was a “ clear plateau position ” in most districts .
“ The pressure on the intensive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” he told the broadcaster TV4 over the weekend .
“ We hope this is a trend that will continue.
” His deputy , Anders Wallensten , struck a similar tone of guarded optimism .
“ We still see that it is levelling off a little , ” he said .
“ That ’ s hopeful .
But this is a hard time and a lot of people are getting ill .
.
.
so the danger is absolutely not over.
” But the optimism was apparently misplaced .
Tuesday the death toll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a single day , and Wednesday saw the second highest jump with 172 more deaths .
The number of deaths increased by 84 today bringing the total to 2,021 .
That ’ s significantly higher than any of its neighbors .
The number of deaths in Norway ( which has about half of Sweden ’ s population ) stands at 191 .
In Denmark ( a bit more than half Sweden ’ s population ) , the figure is 394 .
Yesterday , Sweden ’ s Public Health officials retracted a study @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the country , there were another 999 people who had the virus but didn ’ t know it .
As Allahpundit pointed out even before the retraction , the “ multiplier ” in that study was obviously wrong .
Why ?
Because there were 15,322 confirmed cases at the time .
Multiply that number by 999 and you have over 15 million cases .
The population of Sweden is just a little over 10 million people .
Today officials corrected the record and said the actual multiplier was much lower : The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ epidemiologist Anders Wallensten noted when presenting the figures at the agency ’ s daily press conference at 2pm that it was a relatively large increase on the previous day .
He said they were looking into why , but that “ we are not seeing a downturn ” … Wallensten also corrected figures published in a report by the Public Health Agency on Tuesday , which was almost immediately retracted after a journalist noted incorrect figures in the presentation .
He said that the report had now been corrected , and that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minor changes : it now names April 8th , rather than April 15th , as the date when most people were contagious , and that 26 percent of Stockholmers are expected to have contracted the virus by May 1st .
The main error in the report , that there were around 1,000 times as many people infected by the coronavirus as the number of confirmed cases ( 1,000 times the number of confirmed cases in Sweden would amount to more than the country ’ s entire population ) , had happened when a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the model .
The correct figure is an estimation of 75 cases per each confirmed case in Stockholm .
They had been previously saying that a third of Stockholm would have the virus by May 1 , now that ’ s dropped to a quarter .
The multiplier of 75 , for the number of unseen cases , is a bit higher than the estimate from the LA County study .
That study suggested there were 28 to 55 times the number of confirmed cases .
But as I pointed out yesterday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a similar one in Santa Clara County .
In particular the death rates they estimate doesn ’ t seem to jibe with what we ’ re seeing in New York .
Speaking of New York , there are some significant new antibody test numbers from the state today .
Allahpundit has a post on that coming up shortly .

Sweden saw a big jump in the number of confirmed cases today:
Sweden has seen its confirmed cases of Covid-19 jump from 16,004 to 16,755. The rise was much larger than in recent days, during which Sweden’s Public Health Agency had been cautiously celebrating a flattening of cases. The agency’s deputy state epidemiologist Anders Wallensten said the majority of the new cases were in Stockholm. Increased testing of healthcare workers could be a factor, he said, but scientists were looking into other potential reasons.
The Swedish reporting of new cases has been extremely variable from day to day. If you look at historic charts of the reporting, you can see small plateaus where reporting would drop off for the weekends. That has made it harder to trust the day to day variation because while the numbers tended to look good on the weekend and even on Monday, there was often a surge midweek as those declines were filled in. In any case, earlier this week Sweden’s public health officials were saying it looked to them as if Sweden had flattened the curve:
Anders Tegnell, the chief epidemiologist, said the curve was beginning to flatten and had reached a “plateau” in many parts of the country, including Stockholm, the centre of the largest outbreak. The number of daily new Covid-19 infections reached a peak of 726 on April 8 before falling to 332 four days later. Since then it has inched back up to about 600 new cases a day. Dr Tegnell said there was a “clear plateau position” in most districts. “The pressure on the intensive care units appears to be light,” he told the broadcaster TV4 over the weekend. “We hope this is a trend that will continue.” His deputy, Anders Wallensten, struck a similar tone of guarded optimism. “We still see that it is levelling off a little,” he said. “That’s hopeful. But this is a hard time and a lot of people are getting ill . . . so the danger is absolutely not over.”
But the optimism was apparently misplaced. Tuesday the death toll jumped by 185, the highest total in a single day, and Wednesday saw the second highest jump with 172 more deaths. The number of deaths increased by 84 today bringing the total to 2,021. That’s significantly higher than any of its neighbors. The number of deaths in Norway (which has about half of Sweden’s population) stands at 191. In Denmark (a bit more than half Sweden’s population), the figure is 394.
Yesterday, Sweden’s Public Health officials retracted a study which claimed that for every confirmed case in the country, there were another 999 people who had the virus but didn’t know it. As Allahpundit pointed out even before the retraction, the “multiplier” in that study was obviously wrong. Why? Because there were 15,322 confirmed cases at the time. Multiply that number by 999 and you have over 15 million cases. The population of Sweden is just a little over 10 million people. Today officials corrected the record and said the actual multiplier was much lower:
The Public Health Agency’s deputy state epidemiologist Anders Wallensten noted when presenting the figures at the agency’s daily press conference at 2pm that it was a relatively large increase on the previous day. He said they were looking into why, but that “we are not seeing a downturn”… Wallensten also corrected figures published in a report by the Public Health Agency on Tuesday, which was almost immediately retracted after a journalist noted incorrect figures in the presentation. He said that the report had now been corrected, and that the main conclusion remained the same apart from minor changes: it now names April 8th, rather than April 15th, as the date when most people were contagious, and that 26 percent of Stockholmers are expected to have contracted the virus by May 1st. The main error in the report, that there were around 1,000 times as many people infected by the coronavirus as the number of confirmed cases (1,000 times the number of confirmed cases in Sweden would amount to more than the country’s entire population), had happened when a wrong variable was added in when creating the model. The correct figure is an estimation of 75 cases per each confirmed case in Stockholm.
They had been previously saying that a third of Stockholm would have the virus by May 1, now that’s dropped to a quarter. The multiplier of 75, for the number of unseen cases, is a bit higher than the estimate from the LA County study. That study suggested there were 28 to 55 times the number of confirmed cases. But as I pointed out yesterday, there are some problems with that study and a similar one in Santa Clara County. In particular the death rates they estimate doesn’t seem to jibe with what we’re seeing in New York. Speaking of New York, there are some significant new antibody test numbers from the state today. Allahpundit has a post on that coming up shortly.


hotair--2020-04-23--Whitmer: Stay tuned as we announce some "adjustments" to our draconian lockdown order

Great news , Michiganders — it might be safe to plant seeds in your garden again !
What has apparently convinced Gretchen Whitmer to make “ adjustments ” to her capricious stay-at-home orders , which were so arbitrary that several sheriffs refused to enforce them ?
It might have been the protesters that have made their displeasure known , but I ’ m betting on the fact that the shutdown has put 22 % of Whitmer ’ s workforce out of their jobs .
Reopening businesses that “ pose very little risk ” may be appropriate , Michigan Gov .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Is it public-facing ?
Does the majority of the work happen indoors or outdoors ?
Does it require more than one person using a set of instruments or machinery ?
These are three of many questions that we ’ re asking to assess risk inherent in different sectors of our economy.
” Gee , maybe those are questions Whitmer should have asked from the very beginning .
Other governors tuned their orders more judiciously with those points in mind , and have relied on their citizens to responsibly use social-distancing techniques to mitigate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example , Whitmer ordered people to stop planting and gardening even in their own homes and fields , and blocked landscaping businesses that don ’ t come into contact with others in most instances .
When challenged to explain the necessity these restrictions , she instead sneered that people didn ’ t need to worry about their rights when it was snowing .
Small wonder , then , that Michigan is experiencing the highest level of unemployment in the nation .
Sciutto points this out but never connects the dots to Whitmer ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s worse in Michigan than anywhere else .
CNN also provided a little cover for Whitmer in its earlier reporting on the protests in Michigan , but those are clearly more significant than in other states — which is also a result of Whitmer ’ s high-handedness : “ How are you taking care of yourself ?
” Whitmer asked an intensive care nurse , who said that in more than 30 years of practice she has never seen such an unrelenting barrage of patients and pain .
“ I can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re under.
” But just outside the governor ’ s second-floor office , the front lines of another fight were building , with protesters surrounding the Capitol in a drive-by demonstration to defy the strict stay-at-home orders Whitmer , a Democrat , has imposed in hopes of slowing the deadly outbreak .
The collision between a public health battle and a political one , which played out for more than five hours here on Wednesday , underscores the boiling tensions of a restless nation struggling with the wisdom of reopening the economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as President Donald Trump moves closer to easing national guidelines for social distancing .
Whitmer could hardly ignore the scene , considering the honking horns , raucous jeers and blaring music became background noise for her video conference call with health care workers .
Bear in mind that these protests have been ongoing for a week now , and are only growing larger .
The more Michiganders find themselves out of jobs over Whitmer ’ s diktats , the more they will continue to grow , too .
Small wonder , then , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at “ adjustments ” now .
For a fun finale , Sciutto also asks Whitmer whether she ’ s ready to join Joe Biden on the Democratic ticket .
“ Can Michigan spare its governor ?
” in this crisis , Sciutto asks .
“ There ’ s no place I ’ d rather be than in my home state , ” Whitmer says in her demurral .
That might not last for long , either .

Great news, Michiganders — it might be safe to plant seeds in your garden again! What has apparently convinced Gretchen Whitmer to make “adjustments” to her capricious stay-at-home orders, which were so arbitrary that several sheriffs refused to enforce them? It might have been the protesters that have made their displeasure known, but I’m betting on the fact that the shutdown has put 22% of Whitmer’s workforce out of their jobs.
Stay tuned, Whitmer urged CNN’s Jim Sciutto:
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer tells @jimsciutto that while readjustments to her stay-at-home order are not finalized, they may be coming in the next few days. https://t.co/C7cOOPqpHH pic.twitter.com/po6v6AKWFY — CNN Newsroom (@CNNnewsroom) April 23, 2020
Reopening businesses that “pose very little risk” may be appropriate, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said Thursday. … “Is it public-facing? Does the majority of the work happen indoors or outdoors? Does it require more than one person using a set of instruments or machinery? These are three of many questions that we’re asking to assess risk inherent in different sectors of our economy.”
Gee, maybe those are questions Whitmer should have asked from the very beginning. Other governors tuned their orders more judiciously with those points in mind, and have relied on their citizens to responsibly use social-distancing techniques to mitigate risks otherwise. Instead of following that example, Whitmer ordered people to stop planting and gardening even in their own homes and fields, and blocked landscaping businesses that don’t come into contact with others in most instances. When challenged to explain the necessity these restrictions, she instead sneered that people didn’t need to worry about their rights when it was snowing.
Small wonder, then, that Michigan is experiencing the highest level of unemployment in the nation. Sciutto points this out but never connects the dots to Whitmer’s draconian shut-down order as the reason it’s worse in Michigan than anywhere else. CNN also provided a little cover for Whitmer in its earlier reporting on the protests in Michigan, but those are clearly more significant than in other states — which is also a result of Whitmer’s high-handedness:
“How are you taking care of yourself?” Whitmer asked an intensive care nurse, who said that in more than 30 years of practice she has never seen such an unrelenting barrage of patients and pain. “I can’t imagine the stress that you’re under.” But just outside the governor’s second-floor office, the front lines of another fight were building, with protesters surrounding the Capitol in a drive-by demonstration to defy the strict stay-at-home orders Whitmer, a Democrat, has imposed in hopes of slowing the deadly outbreak. The collision between a public health battle and a political one, which played out for more than five hours here on Wednesday, underscores the boiling tensions of a restless nation struggling with the wisdom of reopening the economy before the deadly pandemic subsides, even as President Donald Trump moves closer to easing national guidelines for social distancing. Whitmer could hardly ignore the scene, considering the honking horns, raucous jeers and blaring music became background noise for her video conference call with health care workers.
Bear in mind that these protests have been ongoing for a week now, and are only growing larger. The more Michiganders find themselves out of jobs over Whitmer’s diktats, the more they will continue to grow, too. Small wonder, then, that Whitmer’s starting to look at “adjustments” now.
For a fun finale, Sciutto also asks Whitmer whether she’s ready to join Joe Biden on the Democratic ticket. “Can Michigan spare its governor?” in this crisis, Sciutto asks. “There’s no place I’d rather be than in my home state,” Whitmer says in her demurral. That might not last for long, either.


hotair--2020-04-23--China imposes restrictions on northern part of country due to new outbreak

This isn ’ t a Wuhan-style lockdown .
For now , the restrictions require “ preventing outsiders from visiting other neighborhoods and warning residents to stay away from high-risk areas.
” But my operating assumption on COVID news from China is that things are always ten times worse than they ’ re actually telling us .
So maybe this is a prelude to a Wuhan-style lockdown as the larger-than-we-realize new outbreak in the north spins out of control .
Resist the temptation towards schadenfreude , though .
This is also a sneak preview of what America faces as we reopen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dealt with a number of cases resulting from people traveling across the border from Russia , the authorities said the outbreak in Harbin could be traced back to a woman who flew to China from the United States in mid-March , and that it had also spread to nearby Liaoning Province .
Officials tested the woman four times , and each time the result came back negative .
Later , after she had given the virus to her neighbor , she was confirmed to have been infected .
Thus far , the outbreak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to the authorities .
China ’ s state media said many of the cases came from two hospitals in Harbin , where a patient with the virus was not properly isolated .
The disease then spread among health care workers , patients and medical aides who gathered in the hospital ’ s corridors to talk .
Officials closed the hospital for disinfection and issued new rules barring visits to hospitals .
Harbin is home to more than 10 million people .
The province in which it ’ s located is now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with 78 infections attributed to a single person .
I ’ m torn between thinking that it ’ s all too predictable that Chinese authorities would source their new outbreak to foreigners , especially someone traveling from the U.S. , and thinking that … that seems possible given what we know about community spread here and in Russia .
( Chinese sources told the Times that a single flight from Moscow to Shanghai on April 10 included no fewer than 60 people who tested positive . )
The person who supposedly seeded the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who attends NYU .
Is it reasonable to believe that she picked up the virus in NYC and brought it back to China ?
Given the mid-March timeline , sure , according to a new model of community spread in the U.S. from Northeastern University : By the time New York City confirmed its first case of the coronavirus on March 1 , thousands of infections were already silently spreading through the city , a hidden explosion of a disease that many still viewed as a remote threat as the city awaited the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number of flights coming into New York from Italy , it was like watching a horrible train wreck in slow motion , ” said Adriana Heguy , director of the Genome Technology Center at New York University ’ s Grossman School of Medicine .
The model estimates more than 10,000 infections in New York as of March 1 .
We know from genomic analysis that the strain of COVID that ’ s ravaged New York came from Europe and Trump ’ s ban on travel from Europe didn ’ t take effect until @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a Chinese grad student going to school in New York picked it up here and brought it home with her .
Just like it ’ s also conceivable that the Chinese are lying their asses off by blaming her : According to a Chinese news outlet , the grad student tested negative in a PCR test *and* an antibody test , suggesting she never had the disease .
Nonetheless , authorities concluded she was a “ silent carrier ” who infected a neighbor and got the latest outbreak rolling .
You believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t been a single death from COVID among a population of more than a billion people since April 14 , don ’ t you ?
Relatedly , a new study from the University of Hong Kong finds that the number of confirmed cases in Wuhan during the original outbreak would have been waaaaay higher if China had used the diagnostic criteria then that they ’ re using now .
Initially they were requiring symptoms plus laboratory tests before declaring someone infected ; lately they ’ ve been requiring only symptoms , presumably because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyone would like .
Result : Instead of 55,000 cases in Wuhan , the true number might have been at least 232,000 .
And I emphasize “ at least.
” If you believe that coronavirus has a true infection fatality rate of something like 0.5 percent then the 3,869 deaths in Wuhan should mean something on the order of 775,000 actual infections .
If you ’ re looking for a more indigenous explanation for China ’ s second wave , try this story from Reuters .
Doctors in Wuhan are baffled that some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to test positive for the virus *months* after they got better .
Are they still spreading it ?
Who knows ?
Either way , the fact that a second wave may have arrived early for them is grim news for Americans hoping to have a reprieve this summer before gearing up for fall .
Singapore , which had great success in containing the first wave of the epidemic , is also dealing with a second wave right now despite their best efforts to keep it at bay — and it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , if you ’ re thinking that hot weather will bail us out .
WaPo is reporting today that researchers in Philadelphia have built a model of 260 large U.S. counties reopening for business on May 15 with half of the current social distancing measures left in place .
Apparently their projections show infections beginning to spike rapidly again in higher-density locations , with even higher peaks than we ’ re seeing now .
Exit quotation : “ It comes back really quick , and the peaks are much higher than what you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was sobering .
I was more optimistic before we did our models .
”

This isn’t a Wuhan-style lockdown. For now, the restrictions require “preventing outsiders from visiting other neighborhoods and warning residents to stay away from high-risk areas.” But my operating assumption on COVID news from China is that things are always ten times worse than they’re actually telling us.
So maybe this is a prelude to a Wuhan-style lockdown as the larger-than-we-realize new outbreak in the north spins out of control.
Resist the temptation towards schadenfreude, though. This is also a sneak preview of what America faces as we reopen for business.
While the area has dealt with a number of cases resulting from people traveling across the border from Russia, the authorities said the outbreak in Harbin could be traced back to a woman who flew to China from the United States in mid-March, and that it had also spread to nearby Liaoning Province. Officials tested the woman four times, and each time the result came back negative. Later, after she had given the virus to her neighbor, she was confirmed to have been infected. Thus far, the outbreak has spread to at least 78 people, according to the authorities. China’s state media said many of the cases came from two hospitals in Harbin, where a patient with the virus was not properly isolated. The disease then spread among health care workers, patients and medical aides who gathered in the hospital’s corridors to talk. Officials closed the hospital for disinfection and issued new rules barring visits to hospitals.
Harbin is home to more than 10 million people. The province in which it’s located is now reporting more than 500 confirmed cases, with 78 infections attributed to a single person. I’m torn between thinking that it’s all too predictable that Chinese authorities would source their new outbreak to foreigners, especially someone traveling from the U.S., and thinking that … that seems possible given what we know about community spread here and in Russia. (Chinese sources told the Times that a single flight from Moscow to Shanghai on April 10 included no fewer than 60 people who tested positive.) The person who supposedly seeded the Harbin outbreak is a 22-year-old grad student who attends NYU. Is it reasonable to believe that she picked up the virus in NYC and brought it back to China? Given the mid-March timeline, sure, according to a new model of community spread in the U.S. from Northeastern University:
By the time New York City confirmed its first case of the coronavirus on March 1, thousands of infections were already silently spreading through the city, a hidden explosion of a disease that many still viewed as a remote threat as the city awaited the first signs of spring… “Knowing the number of flights coming into New York from Italy, it was like watching a horrible train wreck in slow motion,” said Adriana Heguy, director of the Genome Technology Center at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine.
The model estimates more than 10,000 infections in New York as of March 1. We know from genomic analysis that the strain of COVID that’s ravaged New York came from Europe and Trump’s ban on travel from Europe didn’t take effect until March 12. It’s conceivable that a Chinese grad student going to school in New York picked it up here and brought it home with her. Just like it’s also conceivable that the Chinese are lying their asses off by blaming her: According to a Chinese news outlet, the grad student tested negative in a PCR test *and* an antibody test, suggesting she never had the disease. Nonetheless, authorities concluded she was a “silent carrier” who infected a neighbor and got the latest outbreak rolling.
You believe a country that claims there hasn’t been a single death from COVID among a population of more than a billion people since April 14, don’t you?
Relatedly, a new study from the University of Hong Kong finds that the number of confirmed cases in Wuhan during the original outbreak would have been waaaaay higher if China had used the diagnostic criteria then that they’re using now. Initially they were requiring symptoms plus laboratory tests before declaring someone infected; lately they’ve been requiring only symptoms, presumably because testing isn’t as reliable as anyone would like. Result: Instead of 55,000 cases in Wuhan, the true number might have been at least 232,000. And I emphasize “at least.” If you believe that coronavirus has a true infection fatality rate of something like 0.5 percent then the 3,869 deaths in Wuhan should mean something on the order of 775,000 actual infections.
If you’re looking for a more indigenous explanation for China’s second wave, try this story from Reuters. Doctors in Wuhan are baffled that some people who seem to have completely recovered continue to test positive for the virus *months* after they got better. Are they still spreading it? Who knows? Either way, the fact that a second wave may have arrived early for them is grim news for Americans hoping to have a reprieve this summer before gearing up for fall. Singapore, which had great success in containing the first wave of the epidemic, is also dealing with a second wave right now despite their best efforts to keep it at bay — and it’s in the high 80s every day there, if you’re thinking that hot weather will bail us out. WaPo is reporting today that researchers in Philadelphia have built a model of 260 large U.S. counties reopening for business on May 15 with half of the current social distancing measures left in place. Apparently their projections show infections beginning to spike rapidly again in higher-density locations, with even higher peaks than we’re seeing now. Exit quotation: “It comes back really quick, and the peaks are much higher than what you’re seeing right now. It was sobering. I was more optimistic before we did our models.”


hotair--2020-04-23--Georgia Democrat lawmaker resigns after endorsing Trump

On April 14 Rep. Vernon Jones shook the Democrat Party of Georgia with a bold announcement – he is endorsing the re-election of President Trump .
He points to Trump ’ s handling of the economy , his support for HBCUs , and his criminal justice initiative as reasons to do so .
To make the announcement even more interesting is the fact that Jones is African-American .
He is the first elected Democratic official in Georgia to endorse Trump ’ s re-election .
It ’ s probably not out of line to assume that he will be the only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Stacey Abrams is still experiencing her 15 minutes of media attention .
Jones isn ’ t a rookie politician , he is the former chief executive of DeKalb County , Georgia ’ s biggest Democratic stronghold from 2001 – 2009 .
Before that , he was in the Georgia House of Representatives from 1993 to 2001 .
He has held his current seat since 2017 .
“ It ’ s very simple to me .
President Trump ’ s handling of the economy , his support for historically black colleges and his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his campaign , ” said Jones , who added that he had no immediate plans to switch parties .
“ There are a lot of African Americans who clearly see and appreciate he ’ s doing something that ’ s never been done before , ” Jones said .
“ When you look at the unemployment rates among black Americans before the pandemic , they were at historic lows .
That ’ s just a fact.
” Georgia Republicans were thrilled with his decision .
President Trump won 16 % of the vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has won the top office in one of Georgia ’ s most populous and left-leaning counties , therefore he may carry enough influence to sway black voters in November .
His party tried to disown him right away .
The African-American state lawmaker was immediately called “ an embarrassment who doesn ’ t reflect Georgia values ” by another Georgia lawmaker , State Sen. Nikema Williams , the chairwoman of the state party .
“ Never has that been clearer than this moment , when he chose to stand with the racist president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black Americans , who has tried to rip away American health care and who has failed our country in its greatest time of need , ” she said .
Jones has been a controversial figure .
During his time as chief executive in DeKalb County , his temperament was called into question and he faced an accusation of rape , though no charges were filed .
His administration shepherded rapid development and more than $ 350 million worth of funding for parks and infrastructure .
But he drew intense scrutiny for angry outbursts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said was a consensual act between three partners .
No charges were filed .
A special grand jury in 2013 recommended an investigation into allegations against Jones of bid-rigging and theft when he was CEO , but the then-district attorney said he lacked evidence to show any crimes had occurred .
While in political exile , Jones mounted unsuccessful runs for the U.S. Senate , the U.S. House and DeKalb sheriff before his victory in a DeKalb-based House seat returned him to the state Capitol four years ago .
By Wednesday , Jones @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elected office .
This move triggers a special election .
He sites harassment from fellow Democrats .
He is still not switching parties , though .
“ There ’ s nothing the left despises more than a free-thinking black man , ” he said .
He ’ s “ leaving the plantation.
” Jones flipped the racist malarkey back on Georgia Democrats by saying , “ I endorsed the White guy ( Donald J. Trump ) that let Blacks out of jail , and they endorsed the White guy ( Joe Biden ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assume he is addressing Biden ’ s role in President Clinton ’ s crime bill that became law in 1994 , the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act .
That legislation is often criticized by black politicians as laying the groundwork for mass incarceration that has devastated black communities in America .
Biden has been shamed into apologizing for his role in that legislation by other Democrat candidates , most notably Kamala Harris during the Democrat primary contest this election cycle .
Anti-Trumpers who spout off about putting country over party as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see the irony in their logic .
Their mantra only goes one way , against President Trump .
Further complicating that logic is the success that Trump ’ s policies have had with all segments of society .
We ’ ve all heard the talking points – the highest employment rates in all communities ever , including African-Americans , the Hispanic community , and Asians .
Young people and the lowest-paid workers reaped the benefits of the Trump economy with job opportunities and work if they wanted it .
It was all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic foundation before the country entered a shutdown , it is reasonable to think that the economy will successfully rebound once businesses begin to open back up .
It will take time – no one expects miracles overnight – but it is a reasonable assumption .
Status quo politics like that being offered by Georgia Democrats are on the line in 2020 , just as it was in 2016 .
While it is not clear yet if Trump will be successful in November since the country will still be in a tough spot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact that it is bumbling Joe Biden that will be running against him puts Trump in a pretty good position , at least as things stand now .
We ’ ll see where Rep. Jones goes from here .

On April 14 Rep. Vernon Jones shook the Democrat Party of Georgia with a bold announcement – he is endorsing the re-election of President Trump. He points to Trump’s handling of the economy, his support for HBCUs, and his criminal justice initiative as reasons to do so.
To make the announcement even more interesting is the fact that Jones is African-American. He is the first elected Democratic official in Georgia to endorse Trump’s re-election. It’s probably not out of line to assume that he will be the only Democrat to do so, especially given that Stacey Abrams is still experiencing her 15 minutes of media attention. Jones isn’t a rookie politician, he is the former chief executive of DeKalb County, Georgia’s biggest Democratic stronghold from 2001 – 2009. Before that, he was in the Georgia House of Representatives from 1993 to 2001. He has held his current seat since 2017.
“It’s very simple to me. President Trump’s handling of the economy, his support for historically black colleges and his criminal justice initiatives drew me to endorse his campaign,” said Jones, who added that he had no immediate plans to switch parties. “There are a lot of African Americans who clearly see and appreciate he’s doing something that’s never been done before,” Jones said. “When you look at the unemployment rates among black Americans before the pandemic, they were at historic lows. That’s just a fact.”
Georgia Republicans were thrilled with his decision. President Trump won 16% of the vote in DeKalb County in 2016. Jones has won the top office in one of Georgia’s most populous and left-leaning counties, therefore he may carry enough influence to sway black voters in November. His party tried to disown him right away.
The African-American state lawmaker was immediately called “an embarrassment who doesn’t reflect Georgia values” by another Georgia lawmaker, State Sen. Nikema Williams, the chairwoman of the state party. “Never has that been clearer than this moment, when he chose to stand with the racist president who has made an all-out assault on black Americans, who has tried to rip away American health care and who has failed our country in its greatest time of need,” she said.
In a conference call with the AJC, the Georgia House’s three top Democratic leaders backed Rhonda Taylor, a community activist who is challenging Jones in the June primary. House Minority Leader Bob Trammell said he is sending her a check immediately. “We’re not sure what was on Vernon’s mind. It’s antithetical to what we believe in,” said state Rep. James Beverly, D-Macon, the chairman of the party’s House caucus. “We can’t support an ideology that’s diametrically opposed to who we are and what we value.”
Jones has been a controversial figure. During his time as chief executive in DeKalb County, his temperament was called into question and he faced an accusation of rape, though no charges were filed.
His administration shepherded rapid development and more than $350 million worth of funding for parks and infrastructure. But he drew intense scrutiny for angry outbursts and an accusation of rape that he said was a consensual act between three partners. No charges were filed. A special grand jury in 2013 recommended an investigation into allegations against Jones of bid-rigging and theft when he was CEO, but the then-district attorney said he lacked evidence to show any crimes had occurred. While in political exile, Jones mounted unsuccessful runs for the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House and DeKalb sheriff before his victory in a DeKalb-based House seat returned him to the state Capitol four years ago.
By Wednesday, Jones made the decision to resign from his elected office. This move triggers a special election. He sites harassment from fellow Democrats. He is still not switching parties, though. “There’s nothing the left despises more than a free-thinking black man,” he said. He’s “leaving the plantation.”
“I’m sick and tired of me and my family being attacked and harassed by the Democrat Party for putting my country before my party,” state Rep. Vernon Jones, who is black, said. “Turn the lights off, I have left the plantation . . . I intend not to complete my term effective April 22, 2020. However, I will remain woke and vigilant in educating and fighting for my people,” he said.
Jones flipped the racist malarkey back on Georgia Democrats by saying, “I endorsed the White guy (Donald J. Trump) that let Blacks out of jail, and they endorsed the White guy (Joe Biden) that put Blacks in jail.” I assume he is addressing Biden’s role in President Clinton’s crime bill that became law in 1994, the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. That legislation is often criticized by black politicians as laying the groundwork for mass incarceration that has devastated black communities in America. Biden has been shamed into apologizing for his role in that legislation by other Democrat candidates, most notably Kamala Harris during the Democrat primary contest this election cycle.
I wasn’t elected to represent the interests of the Democratic Party. I was elected to represent the interests of my community. And day after day, @realDonaldTrump has delivered for my community and that’s why I’m supporting him. — Vernon Jones (@RepVernonJones) April 15, 2020
Anti-Trumpers who spout off about putting country over party as they resist Trump’s presidency fail to see the irony in their logic. Their mantra only goes one way, against President Trump. Further complicating that logic is the success that Trump’s policies have had with all segments of society. We’ve all heard the talking points – the highest employment rates in all communities ever, including African-Americans, the Hispanic community, and Asians. Young people and the lowest-paid workers reaped the benefits of the Trump economy with job opportunities and work if they wanted it. It was all true pre-pandemic. With such a strong economic foundation before the country entered a shutdown, it is reasonable to think that the economy will successfully rebound once businesses begin to open back up. It will take time – no one expects miracles overnight – but it is a reasonable assumption.
I represent one of the bluest districts in the state of Georgia. My decision to support @realDonaldTrump has nothing to do with political expedience. It’s simply about doing what’s right. — Vernon Jones (@RepVernonJones) April 15, 2020
Status quo politics like that being offered by Georgia Democrats are on the line in 2020, just as it was in 2016. While it is not clear yet if Trump will be successful in November since the country will still be in a tough spot due to the coronavirus pandemic, the fact that it is bumbling Joe Biden that will be running against him puts Trump in a pretty good position, at least as things stand now. We’ll see where Rep. Jones goes from here.
I refuse to be another one of Joe Biden’s “black friends”. What has he done for black people in this country? Author a crime bill that disproportionately put us behind bars that @realDonaldTrump had to undo? Yeah, I’ll pass. — Vernon Jones (@RepVernonJones) April 18, 2020


hotair--2020-04-23--Pete King: McConnell is "the Marie Antoinette of the Senate"

You really shouldn ’ t fight in front of the children .
It only makes them upset .
Unfortunately , some intraparty sniping has broken out over the issue of federal aid to the states in response to the novel coronavirus pandemic .
The most recent flareup came between New York Congressman Pete King and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell .
Cocaine Mitch has recently been voicing some reservations about continuing to flush money we don ’ t have down to the states , most of whom are bleeding cash fighting the virus while seeing massive losses in revenue because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
McConnell ’ s suggestion that some of the states seek bankruptcy protection led King to describe him as “ the Marie Antoinette of the Senate.
” ( NY Post ) Long Island GOP Rep. Pete King on Wednesday ripped Mitch McConnell as the “ Marie Antoinette of the Senate ” after the Majority Leader suggested struggling states go bankrupt amid the coronavirus crisis .
King was reacting to McConnell ’ s comments on a radio talk show earlier in the day where the senator dismissed the idea of more federal aid to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to have free money.
” “ McConnell ’ s dismissive remark that States devastated by Coronavirus should go bankrupt rather than get the federal assistance they need and deserve is shameful and indefensible , ” King wrote on Twitter .
It ’ s understandable that Pete King would be a bit put off since he represents a downstate district in New York , one of the areas that ’ s been hardest hit by the virus and part of a state that has run up massive bills in dealing with it .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be budget cuts of up to 20 % in the coming fiscal year without significant federal aid , impacting schools and a host of New York politicians ’ favorite pet projects .
But with that said , this is a bit of an overreaction on a couple of levels .
First , McConnell wasn ’ t sneering or laughing at the problems facing the states .
It wasn ’ t some sort of dismissive “ let them eat cake ” moment .
So the comparison to Marie Antoinette was a bit over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only stating a couple of harsh realities .
The federal government is already digging a fiscal hole that it ’ s never going to climb out of in providing aid to the states .
This can ’ t go on forever .
And his second point about state government pension programs may sound a bit harsh , but it ’ s also absolutely true .
Quite a few states were struggling to meet all of the pension obligations that took on to meet the demands of state workers ’ unions for many years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York is one of those states , as is New Jersey .
McConnell ’ s comments about the states wanting “ free money ” may have been a bit on the harsh side under these conditions , but it ’ s also pretty much on the nose .
As the federal government continues to bail out states that failed to set money aside for a rainy day , it may salvage their budget outlook in the short run , but the residents of those states are still on the hook .
Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be borrowing money we don ’ t have from future generations and everyone , not just New Yorkers , will be carrying that debt for as long as our government is held together .

You really shouldn’t fight in front of the children. It only makes them upset.
Unfortunately, some intraparty sniping has broken out over the issue of federal aid to the states in response to the novel coronavirus pandemic. The most recent flareup came between New York Congressman Pete King and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Cocaine Mitch has recently been voicing some reservations about continuing to flush money we don’t have down to the states, most of whom are bleeding cash fighting the virus while seeing massive losses in revenue because so many people are out of work. McConnell’s suggestion that some of the states seek bankruptcy protection led King to describe him as “the Marie Antoinette of the Senate.” (NY Post)
Long Island GOP Rep. Pete King on Wednesday ripped Mitch McConnell as the “Marie Antoinette of the Senate” after the Majority Leader suggested struggling states go bankrupt amid the coronavirus crisis. King was reacting to McConnell’s comments on a radio talk show earlier in the day where the senator dismissed the idea of more federal aid to states, claiming governors “would love to have free money.” “McConnell’s dismissive remark that States devastated by Coronavirus should go bankrupt rather than get the federal assistance they need and deserve is shameful and indefensible,” King wrote on Twitter.
…cops, firefighters and healthcare workers makes McConnell the Marie Antoinette of the Senate. — Pete King (@RepPeteKing) April 23, 2020
It’s understandable that Pete King would be a bit put off since he represents a downstate district in New York, one of the areas that’s been hardest hit by the virus and part of a state that has run up massive bills in dealing with it. The Governor has already announced that there will be budget cuts of up to 20% in the coming fiscal year without significant federal aid, impacting schools and a host of New York politicians’ favorite pet projects.
But with that said, this is a bit of an overreaction on a couple of levels. First, McConnell wasn’t sneering or laughing at the problems facing the states. It wasn’t some sort of dismissive “let them eat cake” moment. So the comparison to Marie Antoinette was a bit over the top.
Also, Midnight Mitch was only stating a couple of harsh realities. The federal government is already digging a fiscal hole that it’s never going to climb out of in providing aid to the states. This can’t go on forever. And his second point about state government pension programs may sound a bit harsh, but it’s also absolutely true. Quite a few states were struggling to meet all of the pension obligations that took on to meet the demands of state workers’ unions for many years before the coronavirus rolled into town.
New York is one of those states, as is New Jersey. McConnell’s comments about the states wanting “free money” may have been a bit on the harsh side under these conditions, but it’s also pretty much on the nose. As the federal government continues to bail out states that failed to set money aside for a rainy day, it may salvage their budget outlook in the short run, but the residents of those states are still on the hook. Washington will, as McConnell put it, be borrowing money we don’t have from future generations and everyone, not just New Yorkers, will be carrying that debt for as long as our government is held together.


hotair--2020-04-23--Bankers to AP: Guess how long the new PPP replenishment tranche will last?

Will we have to fight the Paycheck Protection Program battle all over again ?
With the House poised to approve another $ 310 billion in funding for the suspended program , its lenders warn that the money won ’ t go far this time , either .
That amount of money will just about cover the applications that got stuck when the cash ran out two weeks ago , they told the Associated Press , but not much more than those : The more than $ 300 billion set aside to replenish the emergency loan program for small businesses impacted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all spoken for , banking industry groups said Wednesday .
The initial $ 349 billion set aside for the Paycheck Protection Program ran out on April 16 , after being available for less than two weeks .
The Senate has approved an additional $ 310 billion for the program , which the House of Representatives is expected to vote in favor of later this week .
But banking groups say the volume of applications already sent to the Small Business Administration makes it likely that much , if not all , the new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the queue .
Any new applicants would likely miss out on this funding round .
Great .
We waited for two weeks for Congress to get back into session and do its job , and it turns out all they did was their make-up work .
But what about the new rules and restrictions on applications , and the set-asides for community banks ?
Surely that will offer some new opportunities for small businesses .
Roughly a third of the new money has been set aside for smaller banks , which may allow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the queue .
However , small banks have said for the last two weeks that they have been swamped with applications — doing an entire year ’ s worth of loans in a weekend — so it ’ s likely most of that money is now spoken for as well .
If that ’ s the case , how did Congress settle on the $ 310 billion figure in the first place ?
Didn ’ t anyone think to ask how much was in the backlog first ?
Or did this figure arise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would retain enough leverage to force a block-grant bailout for state and local governments in Phase 4 , holding up more PPP funds as the carrot for Mitch McConnell and the Republicans ?
This is yet another consequence of having a Brave Sir Robin Congress in a national crisis , refusing to stand its post while demanding that other essential workers put themselves at risk .
Had Congress remained in session , this money could have flowed more rationally and with enough oversight to ensure against … whatever this is , whether it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the meantime , we have essentially moved no distance at all on PPP .
Sure , this tranche will clear the backlog , but it won ’ t do much for those businesses that couldn ’ t even get into the backlog at all .
With the meltdown in the job market still rolling at a massive pace , this won ’ t stop it , or likely even slow it down all that much .
It ’ s yet another reminder that the only way to keep these jobs from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back open and operating ASAP .

Will we have to fight the Paycheck Protection Program battle all over again? With the House poised to approve another $310 billion in funding for the suspended program, its lenders warn that the money won’t go far this time, either. That amount of money will just about cover the applications that got stuck when the cash ran out two weeks ago, they told the Associated Press, but not much more than those:
The more than $300 billion set aside to replenish the emergency loan program for small businesses impacted by the coronavirus pandemic is likely already all spoken for, banking industry groups said Wednesday. The initial $349 billion set aside for the Paycheck Protection Program ran out on April 16, after being available for less than two weeks. The Senate has approved an additional $310 billion for the program, which the House of Representatives is expected to vote in favor of later this week. But banking groups say the volume of applications already sent to the Small Business Administration makes it likely that much, if not all, the new money will go to those already in the queue. Any new applicants would likely miss out on this funding round.
Great. We waited for two weeks for Congress to get back into session and do its job, and it turns out all they did was their make-up work. But what about the new rules and restrictions on applications, and the set-asides for community banks? Surely that will offer some new opportunities for small businesses.
Er … not exactly:
Roughly a third of the new money has been set aside for smaller banks, which may allow a few new applicants to squeeze into the queue. However, small banks have said for the last two weeks that they have been swamped with applications — doing an entire year’s worth of loans in a weekend — so it’s likely most of that money is now spoken for as well.
If that’s the case, how did Congress settle on the $310 billion figure in the first place? Didn’t anyone think to ask how much was in the backlog first? Or did this figure arise so that Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats would retain enough leverage to force a block-grant bailout for state and local governments in Phase 4, holding up more PPP funds as the carrot for Mitch McConnell and the Republicans? This is yet another consequence of having a Brave Sir Robin Congress in a national crisis, refusing to stand its post while demanding that other essential workers put themselves at risk. Had Congress remained in session, this money could have flowed more rationally and with enough oversight to ensure against … whatever this is, whether it’s incompetence or just high-stakes brinksmanship.
In the meantime, we have essentially moved no distance at all on PPP. Sure, this tranche will clear the backlog, but it won’t do much for those businesses that couldn’t even get into the backlog at all. With the meltdown in the job market still rolling at a massive pace, this won’t stop it, or likely even slow it down all that much. It’s yet another reminder that the only way to keep these jobs from evaporating altogether is to get the employers back open and operating ASAP.


hotair--2020-04-23--Yes, we need litigation protection while reopening the country

A few states are cautiously beginning the process of turning their economies back on and releasing people from mandatory stay at home orders .
But that doesn ’ t mean that all businesses , schools and other entities will be jumping in with both feet .
Part of the reason for this is obviously an understandable level of uncertainty as to whether or not it ’ s safe to do so , but there ’ s another major factor that we should be dealing with .
It ’ s no secret that we live in a very litigious society , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public is going to be worried that if anyone contracts COVID-19 on their property they will be sued out of existence .
Over at National Review , Dan McLaughlin makes the case that Congress should act now to place reasonable limits on such liabilities so people won ’ t be so afraid to bring our society back online as soon as can safely be managed .
The chief reason to act in advance to head off civil lawsuits is to avoid the danger that businesses , schools , and other institutions will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is in society ’ s interests for them to do so .
Right now , many institutions are shut down by direct order of the government ; others closed voluntarily before government orders were issued , or have closed without being required to do so .
Eventually , government restrictions will relax , and that will leave business leaders , school administrators , church leaders , sports-team owners , and others with decisions about when it is safe to open up again .
Most of them , however , will be told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , not what they should do .
In making that decision , they are almost certainly going to talk to their lawyers and worry about legal risk .
They will be told that they have some defenses , particularly if they can claim they were relying on the guidance of government leaders and public-health experts .
Public schools may have additional defenses based on their status as government entities .
Cruise ships are protected by federal laws limiting certain liabilities for deaths on the high seas .
Still , uncertainty will linger .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ nail salons are less likely to have lawyers handy for consultation .
As McLaughlin points out , the lawyers are already circling like vultures over a fresh kill .
There are “ coronavirus litigation task forces ” forming right now , bringing lawsuits and soliciting people to make their claims .
In some cases , the claims may be justified , but many others will be brought by people who are looking for deep pockets to go after over real or perceived harm that couldn ’ t reasonably be avoided .
I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get a free pass on this .
There will probably be unfortunate incidences where schools or employers rush to bring things back to normal without taking reasonable precautions .
As part of the federal response to the pandemic , the government should be providing clear guidance as to the best practices to follow as we reopen .
Students and workers will need to be given more room to spread out and avoid physical contact as much as possible .
New sanitation measures will need to be in place and personal protective equipment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will need to be made available .
But any operation that takes all of these steps and can demonstrate that they ’ ve made a good faith effort to keep people safe should be offered some sort of shield against crippling lawsuits .
The novel coronavirus may well have originated in a Chinese laboratory or perhaps it originally made the jump from some animal to a human being .
That doesn ’ t really matter at this point in terms of the subject under discussion here .
For all intents and purposes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of God at this point .
If you operate a business and your building is full of asbestos or mercury , any employees who fall ill should have the right to sue you because you knew ( or at least should have known ) that you were putting them at risk .
The novel coronavirus isn ’ t something that our businesses and schools could have seen coming and it ’ s virtually impossible to make an establishment 100 % safe without shutting it down entirely .
That ’ s not a suitable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people back to work and our students back to learning , preferably sooner rather than later .
Any institutions that remain shuttered because they are paralyzed with fear of a lawsuit won ’ t be contributing to that effort .

A few states are cautiously beginning the process of turning their economies back on and releasing people from mandatory stay at home orders. But that doesn’t mean that all businesses, schools and other entities will be jumping in with both feet. Part of the reason for this is obviously an understandable level of uncertainty as to whether or not it’s safe to do so, but there’s another major factor that we should be dealing with. It’s no secret that we live in a very litigious society, and any business opening up to the public is going to be worried that if anyone contracts COVID-19 on their property they will be sued out of existence. Over at National Review, Dan McLaughlin makes the case that Congress should act now to place reasonable limits on such liabilities so people won’t be so afraid to bring our society back online as soon as can safely be managed.
The chief reason to act in advance to head off civil lawsuits is to avoid the danger that businesses, schools, and other institutions will be excessively cautious and risk-averse in reopening when it is in society’s interests for them to do so. Right now, many institutions are shut down by direct order of the government; others closed voluntarily before government orders were issued, or have closed without being required to do so. Eventually, government restrictions will relax, and that will leave business leaders, school administrators, church leaders, sports-team owners, and others with decisions about when it is safe to open up again. Most of them, however, will be told by the government what they can do, not what they should do. In making that decision, they are almost certainly going to talk to their lawyers and worry about legal risk. They will be told that they have some defenses, particularly if they can claim they were relying on the guidance of government leaders and public-health experts. Public schools may have additional defenses based on their status as government entities. Cruise ships are protected by federal laws limiting certain liabilities for deaths on the high seas. Still, uncertainty will linger. Small businesses such as barber shops and nail salons are less likely to have lawyers handy for consultation.
As McLaughlin points out, the lawyers are already circling like vultures over a fresh kill. There are “coronavirus litigation task forces” forming right now, bringing lawsuits and soliciting people to make their claims. In some cases, the claims may be justified, but many others will be brought by people who are looking for deep pockets to go after over real or perceived harm that couldn’t reasonably be avoided.
I’m not saying that everyone should just get a free pass on this. There will probably be unfortunate incidences where schools or employers rush to bring things back to normal without taking reasonable precautions. As part of the federal response to the pandemic, the government should be providing clear guidance as to the best practices to follow as we reopen. Students and workers will need to be given more room to spread out and avoid physical contact as much as possible. New sanitation measures will need to be in place and personal protective equipment, hand sanitizer, and other related materials will need to be made available.
But any operation that takes all of these steps and can demonstrate that they’ve made a good faith effort to keep people safe should be offered some sort of shield against crippling lawsuits. The novel coronavirus may well have originated in a Chinese laboratory or perhaps it originally made the jump from some animal to a human being. That doesn’t really matter at this point in terms of the subject under discussion here. For all intents and purposes, we can treat it as an Act of God at this point.
If you operate a business and your building is full of asbestos or mercury, any employees who fall ill should have the right to sue you because you knew (or at least should have known) that you were putting them at risk. The novel coronavirus isn’t something that our businesses and schools could have seen coming and it’s virtually impossible to make an establishment 100% safe without shutting it down entirely. That’s not a suitable answer because we have to get our people back to work and our students back to learning, preferably sooner rather than later. Any institutions that remain shuttered because they are paralyzed with fear of a lawsuit won’t be contributing to that effort.


hotair--2020-04-23--Breaking: Meltdown continues as 4.4M new jobless claims filed

Perhaps not as bad as expected , but bad enough .
The economic meltdown from the Great Hunkering Down abated only mildly last week , with another 4.4 million Americans filing new jobless claims .
That brings the total number over the last five weeks to more than 26 million claims , roughly 16 % of the US workforce : In the week ending April 18 , the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 4,427,000 , a decrease of 810,000 from the previous week ’ s revised level .
The previous week ’ s level was revised down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The 4-week moving average was 5,786,500 , an increase of 280,000 from the previous week ’ s revised average .
The previous week ’ s average was revised down by 2,000 from 5,508,500 to 5,506,500 .
The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 11.0 percent for the week ending April 11 , an increase of 2.8 percentage points from the previous week ’ s unrevised rate .
This marks the highest level of the seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate in the history of the seasonally adjusted series .
The advance number for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ending April 11 was 15,976,000 , an increase of 4,064,000 from the previous week ’ s revised level .
This marks the highest level of seasonally adjusted insured unemployment in the history of the seasonally adjusted series .
The previous week ’ s level was revised down by 64,000 from 11,976,000 to 11,912,000 .
The 4-week moving average was 9,598,250 , an increase of 3,548,000 from the previous week ’ s revised average .
The previous week ’ s average was revised down by 16,000 from 6,066,250 to 6,050,250 .
That came in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ level as last week , reported the Wall Street Journal earlier this morning .
It ’ s still likely to get worse before it gets better , unless the US finds a way to reopen in the face of a global pandemic : Millions of Americans likely filed for unemployment benefits last week , reflecting the depth of the jobs crisis triggered more than a month ago by the coronavirus pandemic .
About 5.2 million Americans applied for jobless benefits in the week that ended April 11 , bringing the one-month total to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a similar number filed in the most recent week that ended April 18 .
Claims , which are laid-off workers ’ applications for unemployment insurance payments , are expected to have remained historically high last week .
Some economists say unemployment claims likely peaked in late March when they reached nearly 7 million .
Others expect a fresh surge of claims in future weeks as workers who were previously unable to file because of backlogged state systems are counted , and as states begin to accept applications from people who are newly eligible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , such as independent contractors and self-employed individuals .
“ These unbelievable numbers are masking a lot of the true demand , and that ’ s what we ’ re going to continue to see play out over the next month , ” said Maria Flynn , president of Jobs for the Future , a workforce development nonprofit .
Speaking of getting worse before it gets better , the next shock will hit the public sector , CBNC predicts : There is one significant difference here , however .
The public-sector jobs will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ situation stabilizes .
Private-sector jobs will get destroyed unless we can find a way to get businesses open again soon .
State and local governments have reliable sources of income on which to draw , but businesses without cash flow or cash reserves will simply go under , never to return .
The priority is to protect the private-sector jobs , especially small-business jobs that employ almost half of all Americans .
One has to wonder how much of this might have been avoided had Congress stayed on the job and kept the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The long delay in replenishing the fund — which won ’ t take place until this afternoon — was a direct consequence of Congress abandoning its post in a national crisis .
Hope the ice cream was worth it .

Perhaps not as bad as expected, but bad enough. The economic meltdown from the Great Hunkering Down abated only mildly last week, with another 4.4 million Americans filing new jobless claims. That brings the total number over the last five weeks to more than 26 million claims, roughly 16% of the US workforce:
In the week ending April 18, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 4,427,000, a decrease of 810,000 from the previous week’s revised level. The previous week’s level was revised down by 8,000 from 5,245,000 to 5,237,000. The 4-week moving average was 5,786,500, an increase of 280,000 from the previous week’s revised average. The previous week’s average was revised down by 2,000 from 5,508,500 to 5,506,500. The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 11.0 percent for the week ending April 11, an increase of 2.8 percentage points from the previous week’s unrevised rate. This marks the highest level of the seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate in the history of the seasonally adjusted series. The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending April 11 was 15,976,000, an increase of 4,064,000 from the previous week’s revised level. This marks the highest level of seasonally adjusted insured unemployment in the history of the seasonally adjusted series. The previous week’s level was revised down by 64,000 from 11,976,000 to 11,912,000. The 4-week moving average was 9,598,250, an increase of 3,548,000 from the previous week’s revised average. The previous week’s average was revised down by 16,000 from 6,066,250 to 6,050,250.
That came in under expectations that predicted roughly the same level as last week, reported the Wall Street Journal earlier this morning. It’s still likely to get worse before it gets better, unless the US finds a way to reopen in the face of a global pandemic:
Millions of Americans likely filed for unemployment benefits last week, reflecting the depth of the jobs crisis triggered more than a month ago by the coronavirus pandemic. About 5.2 million Americans applied for jobless benefits in the week that ended April 11, bringing the one-month total to more than 22 million. Economists expect a similar number filed in the most recent week that ended April 18. Claims, which are laid-off workers’ applications for unemployment insurance payments, are expected to have remained historically high last week. Some economists say unemployment claims likely peaked in late March when they reached nearly 7 million. Others expect a fresh surge of claims in future weeks as workers who were previously unable to file because of backlogged state systems are counted, and as states begin to accept applications from people who are newly eligible under a $2 trillion stimulus package, such as independent contractors and self-employed individuals. “These unbelievable numbers are masking a lot of the true demand, and that’s what we’re going to continue to see play out over the next month,” said Maria Flynn, president of Jobs for the Future, a workforce development nonprofit.
Speaking of getting worse before it gets better, the next shock will hit the public sector, CBNC predicts:
State and local governments are warning of a wave of layoffs and pay cuts after getting left out of the federal coronavirus relief package expected to pass Congress this week. In many places, those painful reductions are already taking shape: Los Angeles plans to force city workers to spend 26 days on unpaid leave as revenues are forecast to drop as much as $600 million next fiscal year.
Detroit has proposed laying off 200 workers and furloughing thousands more.
In Ohio’s Hamilton County, Commissioner Denise Driehaus is taking a 10% pay cut alongside county workers.
There is one significant difference here, however. The public-sector jobs will almost certainly return as soon as the situation stabilizes. Private-sector jobs will get destroyed unless we can find a way to get businesses open again soon. State and local governments have reliable sources of income on which to draw, but businesses without cash flow or cash reserves will simply go under, never to return. The priority is to protect the private-sector jobs, especially small-business jobs that employ almost half of all Americans.
One has to wonder how much of this might have been avoided had Congress stayed on the job and kept the Paycheck Protection Program operating and fine-tuned. The long delay in replenishing the fund — which won’t take place until this afternoon — was a direct consequence of Congress abandoning its post in a national crisis. Hope the ice cream was worth it.


hotair--2020-04-23--Smollett's lawsuit has been dumped

Smollett's lawsuit has been dumped

Despite his many powerful friends in both the political world and Hollywood , things really aren ’ t going well for Jussie Smollett .
After initially being exposed as an obvious hate crime hoaxer and having the charges against him dropped by his friends in high places , Smollett actually had the nerve to attempt to sue the city of Chicago and members of the police department for malicious prosecution , seeking to have his legal fees refunded to him along with other supposed “ damages.
” That case has been dragging out for quite a while now , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wall .
A federal judge has thrown out the lawsuit… at least for now .
( Associated Press ) A federal judge on Wednesday dismissed actor Jussie Smollett ’ s malicious prosecution lawsuit against the city of Chicago and several police officers… In April 2019 , the city sued Smollett seeking reimbursement of more than $ 130,000 paid in overtime to police officers who were involved in investigating the alleged racist and homophobic attack on Smollett , who is black and gay .
Smollett countersued in November , saying the city couldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10,000 from Smollett “ as payment in full in connection with the dismissal of the charges against him.
” The lawsuit said Smollett had been the victim of a malicious prosecution that caused him humiliation and extreme distress .
Judge Virginia Kendall hasn ’ t closed the door entirely on Smollett ’ s claims but instead ruled that malicious prosecution couldn ’ t be proven until all of the charges against him had been resolved .
While this may seem like a technicality , it most likely means that the entire basis for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crippled if not entirely shot down .
The special prosecutor assigned to handle Smollett ’ s case brought six charges against him in February , all related to filing false police reports and lying to investigators as they looked into his claims of being the victim of a hate crime .
Assuming he ’ s found guilty on those charges , the basis for malicious prosecution evaporates .
I probably shouldn ’ t be so surprised that Smollett would have the audacity to try to bring that lawsuit .
He clearly felt that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and his celebrity status and powerful connections would shield him from any legal danger .
And , at least initially , it looked like he was right .
It was only after a national spotlight was turned on the case that the legal system in the Windy City was prompted to do the right thing and move against him .
At this point , all of the evidence that the Chicago PD obtained against him will be back in play .
The two brothers that Smollett hired to help him perpetrate the hoax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a deal to keep themselves out of jail .
I ’ ve long since foregone using the word “ alleged ” when talking about Smollett ’ s hoax because it ’ s so glaringly obvious that he ’ s guilty .
The ten thousand dollars he returned to the city of Chicago doesn ’ t even scratch the surface of the reparations he should be paying .
The police burned through more than $ 100,000 in overtime as they rushed to find the supposed perpetrators of the claimed “ hate crime ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he was actually the guilty party in the story .
We have no idea how much longer this is going to drag out , but the people of Chicago can at least take some small amount of solace from this ruling .
If the courts had actually agreed that Smollet was the “ victim ” here and needed to receive a payday for his actions , there would have been little reason for the city ’ s residents to have faith in their court system .

Despite his many powerful friends in both the political world and Hollywood, things really aren’t going well for Jussie Smollett. After initially being exposed as an obvious hate crime hoaxer and having the charges against him dropped by his friends in high places, Smollett actually had the nerve to attempt to sue the city of Chicago and members of the police department for malicious prosecution, seeking to have his legal fees refunded to him along with other supposed “damages.” That case has been dragging out for quite a while now, but this week it ran into a brick wall. A federal judge has thrown out the lawsuit… at least for now. (Associated Press)
A federal judge on Wednesday dismissed actor Jussie Smollett’s malicious prosecution lawsuit against the city of Chicago and several police officers… In April 2019, the city sued Smollett seeking reimbursement of more than $130,000 paid in overtime to police officers who were involved in investigating the alleged racist and homophobic attack on Smollett, who is black and gay. Smollett countersued in November, saying the city couldn’t recover costs because it accepted $10,000 from Smollett “as payment in full in connection with the dismissal of the charges against him.” The lawsuit said Smollett had been the victim of a malicious prosecution that caused him humiliation and extreme distress.
Judge Virginia Kendall hasn’t closed the door entirely on Smollett’s claims but instead ruled that malicious prosecution couldn’t be proven until all of the charges against him had been resolved. While this may seem like a technicality, it most likely means that the entire basis for the actor’s lawsuit has been crippled if not entirely shot down.
The special prosecutor assigned to handle Smollett’s case brought six charges against him in February, all related to filing false police reports and lying to investigators as they looked into his claims of being the victim of a hate crime. Assuming he’s found guilty on those charges, the basis for malicious prosecution evaporates.
I probably shouldn’t be so surprised that Smollett would have the audacity to try to bring that lawsuit. He clearly felt that the system was rigged in his favor and his celebrity status and powerful connections would shield him from any legal danger. And, at least initially, it looked like he was right. It was only after a national spotlight was turned on the case that the legal system in the Windy City was prompted to do the right thing and move against him.
At this point, all of the evidence that the Chicago PD obtained against him will be back in play. The two brothers that Smollett hired to help him perpetrate the hoax have both turned against him as part of a deal to keep themselves out of jail. I’ve long since foregone using the word “alleged” when talking about Smollett’s hoax because it’s so glaringly obvious that he’s guilty. The ten thousand dollars he returned to the city of Chicago doesn’t even scratch the surface of the reparations he should be paying. The police burned through more than $100,000 in overtime as they rushed to find the supposed perpetrators of the claimed “hate crime” against this celebrity, only to discover that he was actually the guilty party in the story.
We have no idea how much longer this is going to drag out, but the people of Chicago can at least take some small amount of solace from this ruling. If the courts had actually agreed that Smollet was the “victim” here and needed to receive a payday for his actions, there would have been little reason for the city’s residents to have faith in their court system.