# Thread: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

1. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

Originally Posted by B. W.
China prevents US owner company from shipping face masks back to the US proving Trump was right all along about China:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...mic-contagion/
China has stopped exports of mask materials to the South Korean factories. This was after South Korea sent masks to China for aid. When it comes to Trump's claim that they're laughing at America, that claim is true for Xi Jinping.

2. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

Originally Posted by Gigantus
All that anger about me pointing out facts from a document you reference yourself? Or from the other document from the same source?

I am not up to date on the face mask issue, the link you provide in post #134 does not have any details about it, only an observation that not having control over a country means, wait for it, that you do not have control over what they tell you to do (or not) - have you got anything else, eg some official comments from China for the reason? An observation of my own here: patriotism seldom appeals to shareholders, benefits like low production costs do - which all boils down to production in China instead of US.. But then wasting taxpayer's money on incentives for shareholders' benefit to get production back to US isn't the kind of thing that makes a good election story.

Can't make heads or tails about your claim of a 50m increase in global pandemic control from the document you linked - care to link me to the detailed budget version you seem to be referring to? I guess it's part of the 'Global Health' section in the CDC budget? Which was at 425m back in 2016, a 12% increase after\over 4 years appears to barely beat inflation, so I would call that par for the course - nothing to brag about.

I am not too much into the gritty details of American politics (no voting right isn't an incentive), but isn't it the president that signs (or not) the budget? Which means taking credit for it also means having to take blame for it.

PS - I don't give a if the president is democrat or republican, I simply despise anyone that habitually denigrates anyone that doesn't agree with him. The amazing, and ever increasing number of misleading and false statements to further his ambitions is just the cherry on top of it. I am sure there could be candidates deserving my ire on the other of the political divide as well, but their light simply will simply vanish in the glare of Trump's super nova in that aspect.
Maybe we can try again without the hyperbole and grand standing and stick to the corona virus matter? I promise not to point out the issues I have with the president in return.
You admit that you know nothing of the US budget process and yet you weigh in with some whattaboutism. Typical. Trump's budget for the CDC is around 33 BILLION $, not millions. There are no cuts in the CDC budget...which means the articles Conon394 cited were outright lying. That is why it is so shameful. Trump's CDC budget, notice there are no cuts, none whatsoever: https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/p...dget/index.htm The entire Trump proposal for the budget is linked in post #133 if you want to read it. Originally Posted by conon394 I did not realize Forbes was left wing media in your eyes. This from the guy who thinks National Review is a pro-Trump site. You obviously haven't read any of the pap Jonah Goldberg and Rich Lowrey publish there. 3. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World. Right, comparing figures from the same source is whataboutism, let's stick to hailing fixes that reverse the cuts previously done during the same administration. I admit it, US budgets are a mystery to me: I haven't got a clue where the 33 billion figure comes from nor how it relates to the discussion about CDC that we are having here, (figure for the total health care budget?), it certainly does not appear to be for the CDC: according to the detailed PDF that is the source for the figures on the page you link to the total CDC budget is roughly 7.3billion - down over 10% from previous year (8.28b). I used the figures from the bottom line instead of the 'total' (7.18b versus 6.48b), my guess is the 'total' is planned expenditure and the bottom line is provisional \reserve\whatever? Global health is one of the few sections that actually remained roughly the same with 488m. See the screenshots in the spoiler. Note: I have no idea why you continuously mention conon394's links in response to my posts - I am exclusively responding to material you posted, using figures from sources you yourself provide. Spoiler for budget total Spoiler for global health section Looking forward to being educated with facts that actually support your claims. Edit: I am getting a bit confused between you pointing out that the global pandemic control allocation increased by 50m (apparently included in the total of 475m for the global health section as per your linked '2020 budget highlights') and the above '19' budget that was 488m already. Spoiler for relevant budget speech excerpts from your link The Budget provides$476 million for CDC to continue current activities in support of all 50 States and Territories, as well as local jurisdictions, to track and prevent overdose deaths. .....
The Budget includes $100 million to support CDC’s global health security activities, an increase of$50 million compared to 2019 enacted

"Oh, and by the way, you should have read the budget proposal. It includes 100 million to the CDC for the purpose of global pandemic control...a 50 million dollar increase."

I am not sure what is praiseworthy about reshuffling slightly reduced funds. If I am wrong do correct me, please.

4. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

Originally Posted by B. W.
You admit that you know nothing of the US budget process and yet you weigh in with some whattaboutism. Typical. Trump's budget for the CDC is around 33 BILLION $, not millions. There are no cuts in the CDC budget...which means the articles Conon394 cited were outright lying. That is why it is so shameful. Trump's CDC budget, notice there are no cuts, none whatsoever: https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/p...dget/index.htm The entire Trump proposal for the budget is linked in post #133 if you want to read it. Where are you getting 33 billion from, I don’t see it in the link chap. This from the guy who thinks National Review is a pro-Trump site. You obviously haven't read any of the pap Jonah Goldberg and Rich Lowrey publish there. I suppose anything dissenting against the leader is just pap eh. 5. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World. Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun If countries like Iran, Japan, South Korea or Italy starts to show rapid spread of the virus like China have been then it will likely be called a pandemic. It has a huge pandemic potential. We are between Scylla and Charybdis. IF it's better not to impede the free flow of people, in order to avoid economic disruption ( from what I'm seeing in Europe), we are going to let the virus go, and spread rapidly and widely. The question is, are we prepared? not at all. 6. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World. Originally Posted by Ludicus It has a huge pandemic potential. I think its a pandemic now, its just Iran can't measure the extent of the outbreak so the numbers aren't official. Not sure WTF is happening in Italy, very surprised as their health system is not the worst. Maybe decades of Trumpish rule have eroded their state to the point of abject incompetence. Originally Posted by Ludicus We are between Scylla and Charybdis. IF it's better not to impede the free flow of people, in order to avoid economic disruption ( from what I'm seeing in Europe), we are going to let the virus go, and spread rapidly and widely. The question is, are we prepared? not at all. There's more than just two monsters here, there's a bunch of misatched agendas. Countries with ageing populations are looking at a higher number of critical cases: typically they also have something like the infrastructure in place but not the US which has a highly variable (and sometimes vampiric) health system. China's fairly centralised system meant official denial was uniform but so is the harsh reaction in place. The US probably lacks the political will to undertake savage measures if there's a serious outbreak in the continental US. The reversal of CDC cuts is just another example of poll-driven blatherskiting from Trump and demonstrates his unfitness for office; what I would give for a sensible technocrat like Bush Snr in office right now. I'd even take a slimy POS like Clinton or Nixon, at least those oily scumbags were capable. The manufacturing outlook is dire: apparently Apple will run out of iPhones in September. Given Xie (and Trump)'s populism is based in part on the exchange of cheap consumer goods the fact the world's manufacturing hub is shutting down could contribute to political instability, nowhere more than in the two most powerful polities. Retooling for the Philippines or India is possible by likely they will join the party soon enough in any case. The current crisis will likely impoverish Australia which has been living off Chinese expansion for three decades: whatever else happens our happy time looks to be done for now. 7. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World. Originally Posted by Cyclops I think its a pandemic now, The WHO says, "We are in a phase of preparing for a potential pandemic". Originally Posted by Cyclops Iran I completely agree.Estimation of COVID-2019 burden and potential for international dissemination of infection from Iran.. - medRxiv This article is a preprint and has not yet been peer-reviewed ...it is likely that Iran is currently experiencing a COVID-19 epidemic of significant size for such exportations to be occurring. This is concerning, both for public health in Iran itself, and because of the high likelihood for outward dissemination of the epidemic to neighbouring countries with lower capacity to respond to infectious diseases epidemics Anyway, let's keep in mind that Schengen rules give member countries wide discretion to reintroduce border controls in response to a "serious threat to public policy or internal security" (sic) -- Edit, from the news. Chinese Hospitals Deploy AI to Help Diagnose Covid-19 - Wired Definitively diagnosing Covid-19 requires detecting the virus that causes it. Because testing takes some time, and some laboratories are becoming overloaded, clinical signs such as studying lung scans have become more important. Official Covid-19 diagnosis guidelines released by China’s National Commission recommend using chest CT images as a major factor in diagnosis. AI software might lessen the burden on hospitals dealing with outbreaks by helping radiologists identify patients with the disease earlier. Yes! Meanwhile in Japan, Hospitals in Japan refusing to test many who suspect they have Experts point out that the vague criteria have caused confusion among medical staff. 8. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World. Originally Posted by Ludicus The question is, are we prepared? not at all. Any idea what the ventilator to population ratio is... anywhere? I know roughly speaking - not enough. Originally Posted by Ludicus The WHO says, "We are in a phase of preparing for a potential pandemic". The WHO is beholden to political interests. The reality meets their own phase 6 definition - sustained community level outbreak in two or more countries in one WHO region and at least one country in another WHO region. Maybe it hasn't been long enough to be considered "sustained" in Italy or verified well enough in Iran, but that's sort of splitting hairs. 9. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World. Originally Posted by Gigantus Right, comparing figures from the same source is whataboutism, let's stick to hailing fixes that reverse the cuts previously done during the same administration. I admit it, US budgets are a mystery to me: I haven't got a clue where the 33 billion figure comes from nor how it relates to the discussion about CDC that we are having here, (figure for the total health care budget?), it certainly does not appear to be for the CDC: according to the detailed PDF that is the source for the figures on the page you link to the total CDC budget is roughly 7.3billion - down over 10% from previous year (8.28b). I used the figures from the bottom line instead of the 'total' (7.18b versus 6.48b), my guess is the 'total' is planned expenditure and the bottom line is provisional \reserve\whatever? Global health is one of the few sections that actually remained roughly the same with 488m. See the screenshots in the spoiler. Note: I have no idea why you continuously mention conon394's links in response to my posts - I am exclusively responding to material you posted, using figures from sources you yourself provide. Spoiler for budget total Spoiler for global health section Looking forward to being educated with facts that actually support your claims. Edit: I am getting a bit confused between you pointing out that the global pandemic control allocation increased by 50m (apparently included in the total of 475m for the global health section as per your linked '2020 budget highlights') and the above '19' budget that was 488m already. Spoiler for relevant budget speech excerpts from your link The Budget provides$476 million for CDC to continue current activities in support of all 50 States and Territories, as well as local jurisdictions, to track and prevent overdose deaths. .....
The Budget includes $100 million to support CDC’s global health security activities, an increase of$50 million compared to 2019 enacted

"Oh, and by the way, you should have read the budget proposal. It includes 100 million to the CDC for the purpose of global pandemic control...a 50 million dollar increase."

I am not sure what is praiseworthy about reshuffling slightly reduced funds. If I am wrong do correct me, please.
You made your whattaboutism post in defense of Conon394 and now you're denying that it had anything to do with it. I'm not going to engage you in your whattaboutism, move the goal post, pursuit.

The fact is that Conon and his sources claimed that Trump cut the CDC's budget and that is patently false and was proved by the CDC link I provided. The negative figures you quote from the PDF are there because they list reduced funding for building and facilities. That's where they are getting those negative figures.

Anybody who knows anything about government installations knows that there are dozens of empty buildings (real estate) on these installations that are outdated and unused, but still being maintained. I spent over 30 years working at a large government facility and I have seen this first hand. That's where the funding was cut and the PDF shows this.

No program funding was cut. Fact.

10. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

Originally Posted by sumskilz
Any idea what the ventilator to population ratio is... anywhere? I know roughly speaking - not enough.

In Australia 2016/2017 we had 23,000 cases of pneumonia requiring hospitalisation
(that's just under one case per million)
and 6000 cases where ventilation was required. There's a number of well funded programs in all regions addressing pulmonary health because of anti-smoking measures as well as the needs of the ageing population.

Its reasonable to expect overlap of Covid cases with existing cases with poor pulmonary health (COPD, cancer etc) but the high infection rate would conservatively see those numbers multiply if there was a general outbreak.

During the Swine Flu outbreak entire schools were shut down and isolation clinics rapidly established: the population is docile and immunisation friendly so I have some confidence Australia can resist a wave of this. However multiple outbreaks over several years would be a different matter.

Not sure if this is "the Big One" but its a big one.

Originally Posted by sumskilz
The WHO is beholden to political interests. The reality meets their own phase 6 definition - sustained community level outbreak in two or more countries in one WHO region and at least one country in another WHO region. Maybe it hasn't been long enough to be considered "sustained" in Italy or verified well enough in Iran, but that's sort of splitting hairs.

I know you have to make that disclaimer because of how the UN is seen in the US, but this action is not that political in my view. WHO is signalling as hard as it can that this is a pandemic before the definition is met because they see that's how its rolling.

11. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

No program funding was cut. Fact.
Incorrect

Anybody who knows anything about government installations knows that there are dozens of empty buildings (real estate) on these installations that are outdated and unused, but still being maintained. I spent over 30 years working at a large government facility and I have seen this first hand. That's where the funding was cut and the PDF shows this.
https://www.cdc.gov/budget/documents...tification.pdf

Take a walk to page to 310 I see no grand cost saving in only building and facilities - in fact there is a increase. Emerging and Zoonoitc infectious diseases (pg 105) oh yep look cuts now (2020) and proposed cuts in the future.

Proposed page 191 Public Health Scientific Services 578 497 to 58 000 - nope no cut there I am sure they were just lying and running empty buildings... but that would still be in the building and facilities line item not the program budget. Maybe over paid tree trimmers

12. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

Originally Posted by sumskilz
Any idea what the ventilator to population ratio
We are talking about preventive measures. In Europe, in my opinion, we need border controls.

Originally Posted by sumskilz
The WHO is beholden to political interests. .
Saying "We are in a phase of preparing for a potential pandemic" is a realistic statement.The risk of a severe pandemic is very high."Preparing for a potential Coronavirus Pandemic" (WHO, Feb ...
------
Let's see.
The head of immunization at the CDC, Nancy Messonnier, says,
In the absence of vaccines or medicines, officials would need to consider possible school closures
I understand this whole situation may seem overwhelming, and that disruption to everyday life may be severe. But these are things that people need to start thinking about now
I had a conversation with my family over breakfast this morning, and I told my children that – while I didn’t think they were at risk – right now, we as a family, need to be preparing for significant disruption of our lives"
Another realistic statement.

Trump- world's great expert on almost everything - is reportedly furious at her and says US risk "remains very low"
"Low Ratings Fake News MSDNC (Comcast) & @CNN are doing everything possible to make the Caronavirus look as bad as possible"
Trump, not the WHO, is beholden to political interests.

13. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

Originally Posted by B. W.
You made your whattaboutism post in defense of Conon394 and now you're denying that it had anything to do with it. I'm not going to engage you in your whattaboutism, move the goal post, pursuit.

The fact is that Conon and his sources claimed that Trump cut the CDC's budget and that is patently false and was proved by the CDC link I provided. The negative figures you quote from the PDF are there because they list reduced funding for building and facilities. That's where they are getting those negative figures.
You're not engaging anything because you're either not capable or not willing to read basic documents that have been provided by Trump's administration. Just to clear it up for the rest of the forum, you have so far failed to adequately address any point made against you.

Anybody who knows anything about government installations knows that there are dozens of empty buildings (real estate) on these installations that are outdated and unused, but still being maintained. I spent over 30 years working at a large government facility and I have seen this first hand. That's where the funding was cut and the PDF shows this.
You're saying this merely because of the images shown to you and not because you've actually read or analyzed anything. Read the CDC report kindly provided by conon.

No program funding was cut. Fact.
Many programs were cut across the board. Fact.

14. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

Originally Posted by B. W.
The negative figures you quote from the PDF are there because they list reduced funding for building and facilities. That's where they are getting those negative figures.

Anybody who knows anything about government installations knows that there are dozens of empty buildings (real estate) on these installations that are outdated and unused, but still being maintained. I spent over 30 years working at a large government facility and I have seen this first hand. That's where the funding was cut and the PDF shows this.

No program funding was cut. Fact.
If you think my direct response to your post was defending conon's stand then that's fine by me, each to his own defensiveness.

Thanks for pointing out the building maintenance reduction (I stand educated, was it that difficult?), it explains a good portion (480m\68%) of the drop in the overall total budget authority for the CDC, which still leaves a difference of 228m (4% of 6.484b CDC total) that got cut somewhere else - I'll go with 'mildly reduced' here.

Which leaves the second spoiler: leaving the global health section fairly unchanged (reduced by 10m\4%) and then boasting about doubling the money allocated to a sub section [(GHS) (non add)?] of it. The 50m increase (10% of the global section total) came from other sub sections if basic math is to be believed, remember - the global health budget was fairly unchanged (488m reduced to 477m), hence my final observation in my previous post:

"I am not sure what is praiseworthy about reshuffling slightly reduced funds."

In other words: where is the 60m cut that makes up the other side of the equation?

Summary:
1. While claiming that 'no programs were cut' in response to this CDC budget discussion is downright misleading (just as well I promised not to be snarky) given the above anything stronger then 'slightly reduced' would seem excessive.
2. Trying to pass off a reshuffling of funds as an increase in a budget is misleading as well.

15. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

Originally Posted by Gigantus
If you think my direct response to your post was defending conon's stand then that's fine by me, each to his own defensiveness.

Thanks for pointing out the building maintenance reduction (I stand educated, was it that difficult?), it explains a good portion (480m\68%) of the drop in the overall total budget authority for the CDC, which still leaves a difference of 228m (4% of CDC total) that got cut somewhere else - I'll go with 'mildly reduced' here.

Which leaves the second spoiler: leaving the global health section fairly unchanged (reduced by 10m\4% of global health section) and then boasting about doubling the money allocated to a sub section [(GHS) (non add)] of it. The 50m increase (10% of the global section total) came from other sub sections if basic math is to be believed, remember - the budget was fairly unchanged (488m reduced to 477m), hence my final observation in my previous post:

"I am not sure what is praiseworthy about reshuffling slightly reduced funds."

In other words: where is the 60m cut that make up the other side of the equation?

Summary: While claiming that 'no programs were cut' is certainly misleading (damn, I promised not to be snarky) given the above anything stronger then 'slightly reduced' would seem excessive.
There is no particular line item for building reduction. At least not that I found in the Trump proposed budget. Building and Facilities actually get a bump. While programs are de funded - re personal cuts.

16. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

Originally Posted by conon394
Incorrect

https://www.cdc.gov/budget/documents...tification.pdf

Take a walk to page to 310 I see no grand cost saving in only building and facilities - in fact there is a increase. Emerging and Zoonoitc infectious diseases (pg 105) oh yep look cuts now (2020) and proposed cuts in the future.

Proposed page 191 Public Health Scientific Services 578 497 to 58 000 - nope no cut there I am sure they were just lying and running empty buildings... but that would still be in the building and facilities line item not the program budget. Maybe over paid tree trimmers
OMG, Hahaha! It took me five minutes to quit laughing. I hope you wasted your time reading all those pages. Too funny. Agencies always ask for more than they actually expect to get and they always make sure to spend all the money that's left at the end of the year. I can't remember a single year that bosses did not come around and ask for a list of things to buy so the money could be spent.

So, once again, point out a single item in this list that took a cut:

https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/p...dget/index.htm

Originally Posted by Gigantus
If you think my direct response to your post was defending conon's stand then that's fine by me, each to his own defensiveness.

Thanks for pointing out the building maintenance reduction (I stand educated, was it that difficult?), it explains a good portion (480m\68%) of the drop in the overall total budget authority for the CDC, which still leaves a difference of 228m (4% of 6.484b CDC total) that got cut somewhere else - I'll go with 'mildly reduced' here.

Which leaves the second spoiler: leaving the global health section fairly unchanged (reduced by 10m\4%) and then boasting about doubling the money allocated to a sub section [(GHS) (non add)?] of it. The 50m increase (10% of the global section total) came from other sub sections if basic math is to be believed, remember - the global health budget was fairly unchanged (488m reduced to 477m), hence my final observation in my previous post:

"I am not sure what is praiseworthy about reshuffling slightly reduced funds."

In other words: where is the 60m cut that makes up the other side of the equation?

Summary:
1. While claiming that 'no programs were cut' in response to this CDC budget discussion is downright misleading (just as well I promised not to be snarky) given the above anything stronger then 'slightly reduced' would seem excessive.
2. Trying to pass off a reshuffling of funds as an increase in a budget is misleading as well.
Whattaboutism on steroids! There was no cut in the budget. There are no budget cuts on this list. That was the topic. Quit trying to move the goal posts.

https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/p...dget/index.htm

17. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

Originally Posted by B. W.
Whattaboutism on steroids! There was no cut in the budget. There are no budget cuts on this list. That was the topic. Quit trying to move the goal posts.

https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/p...dget/index.htm
Thanks for confirming the page that I got the PDF document from that I am referencing. Do kindly have a look at the bottom, that's where the link to the PDF is. The one with a reduced CDC budget, even after the building maintenance you explained, the one I provided the screenshots from, the one you responded to.

You will then notice that all figures I am mentioning are factual and amount to a mild cut in the CDC budget and no 'whataboutism' shouting is going to change anything about it.

My premise is that your (now repeated) claim that there are no cuts in the CDC budget is factually wrong. And I demonstrated it using material you yourself linked to.

You copied the 'Summary' section of my post, did you read it?

Originally Posted by conon394
There is no particular line item for building reduction. At least not that I found in the Trump proposed budget. Building and Facilities actually get a bump. While programs are de funded - re personal cuts.
See above for the source of my figures.

GENERAL

For some reason everyone appears to be thinking that I am arguing CDC budget changes vis à vis Health budget changes while my only tangential mention of it was the budget speech itself as reference for the CDC figures in my first post.

How many sources\links\screenshots does it take to make it obvious that I am only talking about the CDC budget? How many times do I have to painstakingly make sure to use references to the CDC budget to avoid ambiguity?

Apologies for not making provisions for reflexive responses and automatic assumptions but then comparing the CDC budgets of the last years initially (and never mentioning the total health budget in any form) should have been enough of a give away, right?

Edit: maybe someone can answer me this simple question: "Why would I be interested in discussing the full health budget in a discussion about the corona virus - instead of focusing on the CDC that actually deals with the virus?"

18. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

Again re my post above 151. No Building or facility cuts but program cuts.

19. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

So now we're supposed to trust Pence of all people to be able to handle things if there is an epidemic in the US (as it's looking increasingly likely there will be).

Anyone else getting the distinct feeling that Trump has been told things are going to get very bad very quickly and decided to throw Pence under the bus?

20. ## Re: Coronavirus outbreak - From China to the World.

So now we're supposed to trust Pence of all people to be able to handle things if there is an epidemic in the US (as it's looking increasingly likely there will be).

Anyone else getting the distinct feeling that Trump has been told things are going to get very bad very quickly and decided to throw Pence under the bus?
While the man has no clue were medical issues are concerned this isn't necessarily a prerequisite to head something like this. What will come handy is the fact that he is in a position to get things happening fast, let's just hope that he doesn't mess up like he did in Indiana.

I wonder what he did to piss the president off? It's unlikely this virus will magically pass the US by without casualties, which means he will be the fall guy so that the president doesn't have to back pedal on his assurances.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•