Yeah I was totally with him until the part about taking the walks with his family.

Bro, you're infected and have symptoms. Stay home and do your hikes in a month.

When questioned about this, he tweeted some nonsense about how there's a wide open area behind his house, and that's where they hike. Whatever.

Have you not watched the news from the rest of the world for the past month?

The doctor who helped defeat smallpox explains what’s coming

It's kind of a catch 22. If everyone only bought their usual amount at a grocery store (pure guess, but maybe the average person grocery shops 2-3x a week?) then they'd need to potentially expose themselves to the virus more often than if they stocked up and bought say 2-4 weeks worth of groceries each trip (leading to empty shelves when **** really hit the fan the last couple weeks).

I think I didn't stress enough what I meant. When people saying for the year, they mean FOR THE YEAR. That meaning not letting them return in 2020.
I don't think they talked about this on the news yet.

Typing answer in progress...….

We believe that global action is needed to invest in novel vaccine approaches that can be employed quickly whenever a new virus like the current coronavirus – and also viruses similar to Zika, Ebola or influenza – emerges. Currently, responses to emerging pathogens are mostly reactive, meaning they start after the outbreak happens. We need a more proactive approach supported by continuous funding

https://www.livescience.com/china-co...ne-update.html

They could be miles ahead of times. I know it's a difficult concept to grasp but all of experts basically say that and that nobody wanted to invest 1-2b just to find out the virus is contained or counties like Africa steal the sequencing and all the money for the research is wasted. "Pharma are no charities, they want to see return"

We are talking billions of dollars invested in something without an asured return. I guess thats why even bill gates who warned us didn't put any money in this.
"To prepare for this it required time and money, time they had but nobody wanted to pay the money"
Luckily or hopefully that approach has changed now.

Postponement of the WSOP 2020?

"Stewardess, are you telling us everything?" - Airplane passenger

""Well, we've also ran out of coffee." - Airplane stewardess

And then......... the chaos erupts.

Where is registered?

Originally Posted by ArtyMcFly

If everyone panic-buys more than they need, for purely selfish reasons, you get a tragedy of the commons. i.e. If everyone tries to stock up, like you recommended, the shelves will end up empty for everyone, including you. If people just bought their usual amount, there would be no shortages.


Arty and duvvard,

Yes that was one of the things I raised, that it will become progressively more risky to venture into food shops where you are close to other people, as well as the risk of catching the virus from metal, plastic or cardboard surfaces.

I stand by my point that stocking up has stimulated increased production but I 100% agree that people going berserk, just because they can, people with deep pockets and lots of storage space and multiple freezers in their garage etc are acting immorally.

Arty you said that you had been adding bits and pieces of supplies but unfortunately not enough for what is now known to be a 12 week self isolate for you. So I will very respectfully, and I mean that, suggest that had you anticipated the 12 weeks that you too may well have stocked up for 12 weeks or certainly with more than you had done.

So sensible level stockists, which is what I think I am, one could argue have been tactically astute rather than greedy or immoral.

Another factor, mentioned a few posts ago and confirmed in C4's UK Tv documentary programme last night is that food consumption has now shifted a lot from inside the work place, restaurants, sandwich bars and fast food places etc near people's work place, to more into people's homes. Also most school children now at home so not eating school meals, so all of these factors in part explain and justify domestic shoppers buying more supplies for consumption within the home.

The C4 programme also showed some examples of the food industry ramping up its production to full capacity. It showed an egg farm and a toilet paper factory/distributor.

I am pleased that shops are limiting purchases per customer, having special exclusive shopping hours solely for health workers and that the government have just introduced a scheme/a help line for people self isolating, such as Arty to call to get essential food and medicines to them. We are a civilised country so this is right and proper.

As some extra info for you Arty, in case you are not already aware of it, I have been using my poker brain and more so my tactical skills and I have noticed a definite pattern whereby the smaller independent grocery/convenience stores nearly all have a much better, more regularly restocked, and variety of products supply than any of the big mainstream supermarkets.

So I am talking about Nisa, Costcutter etc. And I have worked out why they do. Firstly, shoppers' behavioural tendencies in these smaller shops have been way slower in moving towards stock piling than in the supermarkets because a) they typically don't have their car and it's boot capacity with them, b) they are usually popping in for a small number of items, e.g. just cigarettes and bar of chocolate, and c) shoppers are not yet thinking about nor taking the time necessary to have a proper look around all of the aisles and on all of the shelves of these types of shops which usually are crammed into a small footprint.

Secondly, I have worked out that the supply chain is very different for these smaller shops compared to the supermarkets, and that the smaller shops are receiving, usually on a daily basis, a disproportionate amount of a wide variety of goods to the number of customers they have compared to the supermarkets. I estimate disproportionate to a factor of the 2x to 5x range.

Example: A Costcutter with 1,000 customers per day is receiving 20 tins of tomato soup, but a large Tesco with 50,000 customers per day is only receiving 300 tins. The figures quoted may be quite off but I believe the approximate ratios are correct, particularly as I have observed the pallets of mixed goods being delivered to my local small food shops and that anything such as tinned food is bought up in an instant by shoppers in supermarkets.

So why is the supply ratio heavily in favour of the small shops?

I think the logical reason is that they are much better higher profit margin customers for the food and supplies distributors. Until now in this crisis, supermarkets have been in price wars with each other due to massive increased competition, e.g. Aldi, Lidl and Asda threatening the likes of Tesco and Sainsburys, so supermarkets until now may have been placing variable size orders from the distributors and naturally also getting lower wholesale prices because they are buying in bulk.

However, many of the smaller food shops are very well geographically positioned, being the only wide stock of products small food shop on a residential housing estate or on a high street etc. Certainly they mostly don't have the level of competition that supermarkets were experiencing.

These small shops are open during very long hours and charge much higher prices for that service, therefore historically have been placing much more regular full volume orders and paying higher prices to the distributors which they then pass on to their customers.
So they are more valuable and very crucial customers to the distributors.

So it appears to me that the smaller shops' piece of the total distribution pie is still at its pre Coronavirus levels.

I posted all of the above as info to help anyone who is struggling to get supplies or to help people helping them out to get supplies for them.

You should not be *******- stockpiling toilet paper and goods, instead you should help bringing stuff to older people and those that can't provide themselves.
You need to see it as a whole. If they get it you might get it or people around you.

I will do that for elderly people close to me that are in need and if this thing goes very deep and its clear that people, of any age in any circumstances at all are without food, I will also donate to people that I don't know.

But if I hadn't stocked up at all, one I may not survive myself and two I then obviously wouldn't be in a position to help others.

A main point is that people will and have been stocking up and there are only really 3 categories of people regarding the to stock or not to stock debate.

People who haven't stocked up at all and have carried on shopping as normal, people who have stocked up to reasonable survival levels, and people that have stocked up to excess.

I didnt mean you esoecially just people on gerneral.
Well good you get some karma points and help fix the situation for all. Stocking up you should probably also but not too exessively.

And Yes and that 3. Group those excess buying idiots take away stuff from peope who need it. They should be clogged (not literally ) at the stores bc they are worsening the situation. Everyone should have everything to not spread it

Are you asking how many registered for this?

477 runners, 159 rebuys,
318k prize pool, paid $77,910 for 1st.
The guy who won it also got 2nd in the $1000 6max for $43,600

No I actually meant where the op is registered2018 as his predictions or ideas seem to come true.

Many online events now.

Yea, he disappeared like the guy in another thread wanting to bet like 2 weeks ago that US deaths wouldn't hit 500. Except Registed was correct.

Are you in Washoe County, NV?

No I am in Berlin, Germany. I can litterally walk to the guy that invented the Covid test Dr. Drosten, he is 15 miles away.

Washoe industries is the name of the company in gold with Mathew mccanaughy ( i doubt I spelled that right) good movie

Doubtful that $1B+ invested in develop of medicine and a vaccine for SARS-1 would have sped the process for the current SARS-COV-2. Here's why:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...-so-hard-kill/

Investing in lab equipment and personnel that would be prepared to jump start the process of developing medicine and a vaccine for a novel virus when an outbreak occurs would help, but it's not a panacea against a pandemic.

The dominoes are falling and I don't see how the WSOP can run at this point. Here are some of the things that I've heard in the last few hours that aren't in this thread:

Local (US state of Michigan): Bus routes being cut back (not much social distance on a bus). My county now has it's first positive Covid-19 test. Our governor has ordered an end to all nonessential driving, and the closing of all nonessential business.

I called my mechanic, who is waiting for parts to fix our car. I told him not to prioritize that job because we have another car and can wait because we work at home. If Firestone is not considered an essential business, people can't get their cars fixed. (I think that it should be considered essential as they work on police cars.)

National and international: The governor of the state of New York says that states are getting in bidding wars to get masks. I don't remember the exact words, but it was something like this: If we want to order a bunch of $6 masks, another state will offer $7.

U.S college students at closed colleges are scrambling to find places to live.

Canada and Australia are not going to go to the Olympics.

Just like the rest of the world

Olympics postponed

Bobo makes some good points, and I would add that I think this is sort of 20/20 hindsight. After every big event which negatively affects people, there are those who scream out "I told you so", or "If only they had listened to us". And some of these people are, of course, correct. That is the nature of 20/20 hindsight.

I guarantee right this minute there is some person or persons sitting in their lab, or office thinking up the next great calamity to befall the U.S., or world. Maybe there will be an alien attack, or asteroid strike, or solar flare, etc. etc. etc. And whatever money is being spent right now to prevent or mitigate those hypothetical situations, or any others, will likely not be enough in hindsight. And even if we are somehow better prepared for some things that may happen, we will be less prepared for some other potential event. That is the nature of a world with limited resources. So being "proactive" in regard to one threat or another boils down to an exercise in risk analysis. Until COVID-19, infectious disease was not as high a priority as many of the other things which have the potential to kill people and/or cause economic chaos in most countries. And there's no really good reason to believe it should have been, at least in the U.S., since there hasn't been this sort of event in a hundred years. We don't yet know what the overall "health" impact of COVID-19 will be in comparison to similar events in the recent past which could have served as a model. But we do know it has already had a major economic impact which hasn't been seen in some time. I suspect this sort of event will rise significantly as to what is on governments' radar and what measures they are taking to prevent and or mitigate them in the future.

But, "pro-activity" with respect to discrete risks is still a non-solution to the greater and more general problem of... how fragile is the economic and social fabric of our highly inter-connected world? Somewhere, somebody is thinking about this. Hopefully they get some attention.

At least the Chinese wet markets are banned permanently now.

BTW, the virus didn't come from eating bats. The virus moved from bats to some other animal, and from there to humans (probably at the market).

Bats have a soup of coronaviruses, constantly mutating. Only seven coronaviruses are infectious to humans.

Here's an interesting article:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0210144854.htm

I disagree about the reasons it won't be the same...plenty of people will be willing to get out and about. The PROBLEM is going to be the lack of available discretionary income since too many people have a SAVINGS problem, meaning they are incapable of putting aside any amount of money. This is precisely why we are seeing so much whining about mortgages and other loans when a lot of those people have not even MISSED a paycheck.

Those with the funds will be very quick at getting back to the tables and making up for lost time...

The death rate arc peaks at FOURTEEN DAYS AFTER FULL LOCKDOWN.

So you can infer that THE DEATH RATE WILL NOT PEAK UNTIL FULL LOCKDOWN.

Why is not every State doing a full lockdown. I think enough time has past so the Great Unwashed illiterate masses can process a full lockdown in their collective pea brain minds.

Don't you?