Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "misesmedia" channel.

  1. 13
  2. 10
  3. Mortality rate from data: 3,25 % of all identified cases (= tested positive) die. If we assume that for every infection they find there are 3 more that are not found - a bold assumption - the calculated mortality rate is still 0.8 %. The deaths are confirmed as "died from CoVid-19" Now this is a country (Austria) that contained the virus well (lockdown mid March 2015, then gradually reopening. Since July also for tourism from "safe" countries (so not the U.S.). and they have their act together when it comes to testing. Moreover the population has not incentive to avoid testing and they get it if there are symptoms or if they had contact. (free). Treatments are free as well and they have had paid sick leave for decades (and if a person is fired during sick leave the company has to pay them anyway, so that makes the firing pointless especially when you can assume the staff member will return in 10 days or 14 days. If anything one person that add some immunity. People will get tested, they get it free, and the logistic for testing works. Pluse contact testing and some random testing (or checking on childcare centers, care homes for the elderly, meat packing, ...) So 3 undetected cases for every infection they diagnose is a generous assumption. Especially now, when it is summer and every "cold" would stand out. If you have cold like symptoms there is a good chance it could be CoVid-19. in Fall this will be more tricky but not now. Children have been tested - as the case numbers are low the childcare centers are not the hubs. So far it is spread within families or certain work places, or churches (ventillation seems to be an issue). Or clusters in touristic destination, hotels, ... Per million residents 81 people died from CoVid-19, but 490 in the U.S.The economy is open, but there are restrictions, spacing in concerts, restaurants, and masks. (they loosened that, but masks are back). The government goes with the developments.
    3
  4. 3
  5. 2
  6. 2
  7.  @vallieg979  there was a time when there were only 20, ...50 cases in China, Italy, Iran, Russia, Brazil, U.K. France, .... or Germany that was luckier and responded better than these nations. CoVid-19 is like a (potential) wildfire. if you do not have some restrictions in place and watch the situation like a hawk fires WILL pop up - and then grow. Fast. Think a draught, a heat wave and potential wildfires. your only chance is to find the tiny fires immediately, to identify where they could be started by stupid or criminal humans or occur naturally. it will be a lot of effort throughout the season to monitor that and likely there will be some restrictions needed (and it will be a somewhat fragile balance even if you think you got this). Testing, monitoring, contact tracing.... is the equivalent to finding the small fires before they grow. If you have a fire that gets larger it must be all hands on deck. Half baked measures will not help. It needs an extra effort to put this out, but there is a chance you can prevent a lot of damage. If you have catastrophic wildfires - like Australia 2019 - it will have to be a mega effort, there will be a lot of damage nontheless, and the efforts have to be sustained longer (that was Italy for instance). Not an option: trying to "manage" fairly large fires with a little bit of effort. You either put them out or they will grow even bigger. There is no "happy middleground". 1) You can either let them burn down the whole region - not really an option 2) Or try to find potential fires and control them, so you nip it in the bud. That is the best outcome, but it is not easy and it is not sure it will always work. 3) or you have a fire that is just about to turn into a real problem but you still have a chance to catch it with fast and decisive action. And it will need a good effort. - That is Melbourne. 4) you botched or it was bad luck. Condolences. After a lot of effort to prevent even more catastrophic damage and after a lot of losses you can try to get to 2) That was Italy U.S., Brazil act like they do not notice the fire.
    2
  8.  @stumetallicafan  Not into fact checking are you ? The demonstration in Berlin was around 20,000 people from all over the country (of 83,2 millions), Frankfurt did not have many protesters. But some of the antimaskers spread that number (1 million) on Sunday. It costs the same if you invent a small or large number, I guess. In defense of Germany: most people are reasonable. The protesters (at least the ones that moved in close proximity and in most cases w/o masks) are protected by people that are more responsible. And a government that together with cooperative citizens kept the case numbers down. Which creates more margin also for these protesters. They are pushing their luck, but since the case numbers are not high, they might get away without getting infected. Many of the involved are not young. The masks should fit well and be worn with a tight fit. Then even homemeade masks (fabric) can offer good protection. Loose fit reduces the efficacy significantly. Maybe there is an effect because masks remind people not to touch their faces when they are in public places (where they shouldnot do that). I would not be suprised if it only prevents 20 % of infections, or even 10 %. This is a all hands on deck situation. Most people CAN wear a mask if they do not suffer from childishness, and politically motivated obstinancy. It is a small sacrifice and I will gladly take the 10 % advantage. This is a fight against a pandemic and so far there is not much we can do about it. If mask wearing shaves off 10 % or 20 % and allows the reopening of the economy or keeping it open - that is good enough for me. It is a somewhat fragile balance. The infections are like wildfires. There is a point of no return - where it spreads from small case numbers, and gets out of control see China in ? Dec. 2019, and Italy and France, Spain in late February, March 2020. Or Brazil the U.S, .... It is not gradual. And the 10, 20, 30 % can make or break the fragile balance. Or they give us more margin to maneuvre and for mistakes.
    2
  9. 5:07 these well intentioned people think they have one of the village idiots in the comment section. Or a bot. so they explain the basics, just in case completely ignorant persons or other people reading the comments will listen. - Judging from the generic stupid / uninformed talking points there are a lot of people that repeat right wing talking points (spread by think tanks or bot farms). They never verify them, never think things through, never care to know the basics about an issue - and never update their talking points no matter how easy and logical it is to dismantle that. Been there done that (generic talking points against climate change, by all means argue against it, but can't you at least bother to come up with halfway decent arguments ?) the Think tanks have their own reasons to spread misinformation and shallow talking points, I do not doubt that most people working for them are intelligent and know exactely what they are doing. That is why some people feel compelled to explain the basics. If Woods is not up do date or wrong, it is wilful ignorance and financial interests, I am sure of that. Along with carefully cerated "arguments". So he will have to ignore the information-do-gooders, just do not read what they post. Others in the thread might benefit. this country has elected Trump (whatever you think of him - he is in cognitive decline, compare him to videos of 15 years ago. Not that he functioned on a high intellectual level before, but it has gotten much worse. Also: Joe Biden is now the other Republican nominee, just with a D to his name). People disagree with climate change and evolution. This country does not value intellect, fact checking, information. There are people out there that think you can apply light internally or ingest bleach (the president on national TV). Or who INSISTS that hydroxycholorquine can help. Again: the president and many of his followers and his idiotic "economic advisor" Navarro. (Or Trump fans who take that as meaning you can eat the chemicals meant for cleaning fish tanks.) There are people that watch Faux Infotainement (not that the "liberal" networks are much better) but the proud disregard for facts and science is even hihger with FOX. It was settled before court - according to the arguments of FOX - that they are NOT "news". Fox does not want to be seen as News stations (under the LAW, mind you). I am talking about the Murdoch inspired part no the small part that Disney bought Now, I think prez and Navarro have financial interests. With Trump it might be also the desperate desire to have something that "will make it go away". His strategy when he got into trouble was to getting money from daddy (in the early days his much more business savvy father bailed him out) and later to declare bankrupcy, stiff the contractors, to scam gullible people. Examples: Trump "university" Tampa and Baja Mexico condo projects I seem to remember one apartment / conod project in ? Arizona, Trump and sons advertised and gave the impression they were also invested in the project and took part in managment. The U.S. press and media are to blame, the did not get scrutiny (outside of New York) I guess some ads revenue "fixed" any ideas of local edia of doing journalism on Trump. Trump and his sons were only the mouthpieces in ? AZ, and they did not protect the "good" name by checking out the project or monitoring it. They took as many licencing fees as they could extract in short time and they run. Of course the investors lost their money. (Trump did not pull off these stunts in New York, they knew him, he would have been ousted). Running and discarding a project after he secured HIS assets or fees - does not work with a pandemic. That is why he comes up with so many ludicrous ideas. Being POTUS in times of a pandemic does not work like that .... You cannot weasel your way out of it. .
    2
  10. 2
  11. 20:00 So Dr. Shapiro of Pittsburgh Medica Center was ticked off .... the preparation for a worst case scenario wasn't necessary ... Then . A correct and timely response to an epidemic that nips it in the bud will always look like an overkill - if it was successful. That is one of the reasons it is so hard to do for politicians. If the Chinese had done the right thing before the virus mutated to be MORE contagious, we (humans on the globe) would be blissfully ignorant. (the new virus strain has spread globally in March, most people that have been infected already got the new more contagious = harder to contain version). We were also bilssfully ignorant in ? 2002 / 2003. China then also dropped the ball - but somehow they could stop it in Asia. Taiwan, Hongkong, Singapore. Taiwan and South Korea were badly burned. That is the reason they did not believe the claims of China at the end of Dec. 2019 (virus is not transmitted between humans, we have got this). They assumed the worst case scenario, jumped into action on January 1st, 2020 - at least Taiwan did as early) Does the good doctor remember that the Chinese took it easy, didn't want to do a shutdown - and later used the military to shut off Wuhan. Italy was in denial in late January and early February because they did not want to shut down the economy (which was their window of opportunity) and the rest of Europe was in denial in February when they had a chance to get this right in the first round and w/o the pain of shutting down the economy (almost all of retail and the service sector). ONLY on March 9th, Italy imposed a national lockdown. And the neighbour countries (who had been eyeing them nervously in February followed mid March). Italy had to use the rules of triage in early March already. (5 days overal before people have symptoms, a few days more until it gets really bad. The first patients they got were still in the hospital, so the system was clogged up soon. The wide spread, where they lost the battle even though they did not realize it then, happened im mid February. It just took a while for the fallout). Italian doctors (or those in Spain) had to handle triage inofficially. it was better in France and Spain (they got hit later), France and Italy got help by Germany and Austria, once those nations were sure their situation would not get out of hand. Triage and then the national lockdwon in Italy was one of the things that hit home for their neighbour countries. In Feburary .... Italy had this problem but it still did not compute. First Italy did a regional instead of a national lockdown (that was a major mistake, in Wuhan the military made sure people did not flee the quarantine and spread it even more). And THEN it got really bad in the hospitals. 5 days incubation time on average, and a few days until a patient has to go to the hospital, 10 - 14 days can change a lot. And they could not release the earlier patients in the ICU either, it was not limited to giving them a leg up for a few days, and done. Back to a normal hospital bed or care at home. Some people were 5 - 6 weeks in intense care and survived. (not necessarily in Italy). Italiy published the rules of triage for the hospitals in the most hit North of Italy, the ethic rules how manage the insufficient * resources. Like a field hospital in the war zone, the rules who would be given a fighting chance and whom they would let die. (italian doctors weeping in the wards as they had to make the decisions to withhold care from nice older patients). * insufficient in the crisis they have a low number of beds per 10,000 residents compared to other European countries but still higher than in the U.S.)
    2
  12. 2
  13. 5:07 Woods may be able to intellectually grasp the FIRST goal in the battle = flatten the curve. (if he is honest with his arguments is another question). FIRST goal = To avoid overwhelming the hospitals. It does not matter what politicians said or realized in March - Of course it is THEN necessary to bring the case numbers down, all other nations did that. And have successfully reopened the economy. having the ICU almos full is expensive, it increases risks for medical staff and truth is: you either only have embers that you put out all the time, watching the situation like a hawk - or you will soon have a raging wildfire. It is not possible to have the ICU relatively full but not overwhelmed accepting the additional deaths of poor, old and vulnerable people and hoping it will NOT get out of hand. You cannot keep it at a "medium" level. Neither is that possible with a wildfire. Because of the high growth rates - either it is embers and little fires (that mean state of emergency and the last chance to catch it early before it gets out of control). Those embers / little fires. must be put out immediately. Then it is possible to maintain a fragile balance (think California during a heat wave and a draught) OR it will be a wildfire / exploding infection numbers. There is no happy middleground (less effort and only "acceptable" losses for wildfires, epidemics, cancer of avanlanches. (high growth rates and undesireable outcomes). That media persons and people online or in real lafe later switched their argments to: "Even if it only saves one life ... " has no bearing on how the GOVERNMENT is supposed to MANAGE a PANDEMIC. Giving correct info (the best available info at that point), helpful and plausible advice is part of the navigating the situation. Media, laypersons and think tanks may utter their own theories. The president has the bully pulpit. He could have dominated the discussion. Well not - Trump he is an idiot and panicked by the idea that he cannot bullshit his way out of this one. Obama handled Ebola - and the chasing after the clickbait and "breaking news" UNculture was also very unhelpful. And iditos (Republican politciians) made political hay of it. (Like trying to be smarter than doctor w/o borders regarding necessary quarantine measures, the very persons who did the dangerous work to help contain it in Africa). Obama handled despite the nonsense by mainstream media. Some improvising is inevitable. You cannot afford to let it spread (there is a reason it became a PANDEMIC = contagious), but that is usually a major way to get more insights in medicine. Especially if you cannot run studies with controlled conditions (how do you simulate how lay persons handle hand hygiene and or wearing a mask, which they do often incorrectly so with reduced protection. Or the many setups of A/C and ventilation. Usually after years you can try to do some very large studies taking the real population. the nurses studies are famous in the U.S. Ten of thousands of nurses and decades. it gives insights but it takes loooooong). So naturally politicians and expersts will and must err on the side of caution. If you get it wrong it will end really badly. See China in January, and Italy in Feburary. After the first goal is reached, strategic testing (some random, most contact testing) helps to NIP IT IN THE BUD. Under these conditions it is possible to MAINTAIN A FRAGILE BALANCE. See Europe, or Canada, or Australia. Incl. lockdown in Melbourne. Not in the U.S., U.K. because the response never was decisive enough. Half baked does not work with a pandemic. And Sweden because they had a different approach. Which cost them around 5,000 additional dead people (if you compare them with their neighbour countries. Their economy doesn't do any better, they export a lot, and THEY are missing out on tourism. While most European countries have tourists. There was a travel warning until July.
    1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18.  @Paladin101  You should check out MMT (Mosler or Kelton) and positivemoney (dot) uk. Or Debt and Interest Free Money (Dr. Richard Werner). To counteract the inevitable pearlclutching about "there is not enough money" (Oh yes, there is - if you see it in the large scheme of things, over decades. And they would find the money, if it was for coal or any other large industry / party donors). Of course the governments everywhere could also finance such help with conventional budgets - government debt (realistically they cannot get taxes from the big tax dodgers as long as the U.S. is not on board). Maybe the EU could if they wanted to, but Australia on its own would have a hard time. But that would violate an article of faith, and especially your right wing government would much rather ignore small biz, than violate doctrin for you. The city cannot do that, they do not have the budgets and cannot create money. As for more debt - which would be the other, the conventional solution - that can be handled: See U.S. after WW2. Highest ever federal debt in 1947 (118 % of GDP - 2020 might topple that, considering the high debt and the drop in GDP. In the U.S. they threw some bones to the citizens, crumbs for smaller biz and big biz got theirs. Some in form of QE and some is debt). In the early 1970s that had dropped to the low 30 %. Governments would be salivating over 50 % (ratio of GDP versus debt). even pre corona. In that time increasing wages (purchasing power of the average hourly U.S. wage almost doubled + 97 % between 1947 and 1970). high taxes on profitable biz and rich people. The only chance to evade taxes for businesses was to invest. Which drove innovation, and productivity (which paid for the increasing wages). And ongoing government investment. Sadly a lot of military spending but also long term civilian investment. Public housing, Interstate highway, G.I. Bill (higher education), farm subsidies, .... Marshall plan (export help for US. biz). JFK and Nixon discussed 72 % effective top marginal income tax, and for a few millions yearly income - in todays money. It was still 92 % in the books (from 1944 for 400,000 USD, what today would be 2,7 million USD) but many loopholes had been added. Nixon accused JFK of wanting to cut the taxes for the rich. JFK begged to differ, the effective 72 % would bring more revenue ... this was in 1960 in a presidential debate on radio, and no one freaked out. That was the Golden Era. Also for those who founded and run businesses. Government can create money, they did so in form of QE during the Great Financial Crisis. 4,5 trillion under Obama, 4 Trillion in the Euro Zone by the ECB, and 700 - 800 million pound by the Bank Of England. They have started with QE again in the U.S. I know that such concepts were used in WW1 in the U.K. (Bradbury Pound). Even the Nazis used a variation of that (partially) to help finance rebuilding their military. Now that worked: one of the things that gave Chancellor Hitler legitimacy was the spectacular rebound of the German economy. Between 1918 and 1933 it was a succession of misery and very slugish recovery and the next crisis. they financed real investments, in streets, public housing, railway, motorways ... and tanks, airplanes, military research .... From an economic point it does not matter if you build tanks - or cars, and household appliances. Railway can provide excellent public transportation. Or be the logistics preparation for war.
    1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21.  @alikatty1118  Testing is the tool to MANAGE the crisis. That was the other idiocy to only test in hospitals in the U.K. (and to let it get out of hand in March). I get it - there were too many cases to handle the testing. Well then the ONLY solution would have been LOCKDOWN and bailing out citizens and smaller biz (big biz should be made to assess the profits of former years). ON the other hand it was really bad in Italy, and not much better in Spain and France. But these nations made the necessary determined efforts, they paid the price (and did not try to weasel out with half baked measures) and they made the investments in March. That is why they are O.K. now and the U.K. still fumbles around. Sweden has not defunded its care homes and healthcare like the U.K. they have many single households and not the large cities. also much more rural areas. So they have better conditions to pull it off. But their elderly in the care homes have paid the prices. 550 deaths per million. In Sweden they let them die in care homes that is why their hospitals are not overwhelmed (Dr. John Campell had a video on Sweden in June) The infection is like a wildfire (or danger of a wildfire) during a heatwave and draught. You need to watch every little glimmer and put it out immediately. (That is what South Korea and Taiwan did, excellent EARLY response in January and Feburary.). The other nations let it become a fire, a wildfire or a catastrophic wildfire. They all had to put in a lot of effort to get it under control. With lockdowns ! Which sucked. But it also helped. As they had not reacted in time and were not prepared with materials, they had to pay the price. Cases shot up fast and dropped slowly, even during lockdown (only essential shops open). In a country that was not hard hit (I know the data from Austria). Despite unprecedented efforts it took quite some time to get back to low case numbers. I would say around end of May/mid June they were at the stage of last days of February, first days of March (where they still could have avoided the whole hassle). But during lockdown and gradual reopening they had used the time to organize PPE, to adapt the shops, and above all to have laboratories in place that can handle the testing (while caser numbers are low, mind you). So it is early March again (regarding case numbers) but this time prepared and with the tools. Every reopening btw showed that there were more cases. So it is a fragile balance. It can be maintained but with constant vigilance. And only if you operate from low case numbers and can do mass testing whenever there is a hotspot. Now they have strategies how to do testing (they didn't have that in early March, not the labs, the materials, and also not the strategies).  Where I live the government also changes course. Mask mandate loosend, then they are mandated again. They tested randomly in childcare, looks good so far. They changed policy how and what to close down and quarantine if they have a case in childcare. (less strict, they think they can take it easier, after some cases backed up with the experiences, and the follow up). That is helpful because the more they quarantine the more disruptive it gets - and now they think they can manage that with doing less. Of course some measures are more reasonable than others. They learn as they go. Obviously they want to allow the restaurants to stay open. people sit in close proximity and w/o masks so that is a good chance to spread it. And if the virus is very prevalent, that is going to happen. There is no additional risk if it is one household. They are together at home as well.
    1
  22.  @alikatty1118  Austria is a neighbour country of Italy. Watching them mid February (and getting more and more nervous). While a state government botched the response to an outbreak in a touristic hotspot, late winter season. The federal government let them pursue the tourism friendly disregard of the laws (for infectious diseases). So they were kind of schizophrenic about it. They were very lucky that it did not backfire - in casualties. Bad PR fo the region and a criminal investigation now. Skiers tend to be younger or middle aged, and healthy, so not many died. But of course foreign tourists then left the chic touristic destinations and returned to their home countries, some with the virus. Iceland busted them, they tested tourists returning from Austria directly at the airport, and 2 out of 8 tested positive. Embarrassing for the Austrian government. Now we know retail prepared in February (stocks of food). It got really bad in Italy in the first week of March and that sent shockwaves through Europe. Maybe it was not felt like that in the U.K. - but politicians and population on the continent paid attention: Switzerland, Germany, Austria, France, Slovenia, Spain, .... with Italy that is 275,1 million people, I would estimate 60 % of the EU and associated nations (w/o the U.K.). The Germans drive through Austria to visit Italy and they have many Italian migrants (from the 1970s). So they count as honorary neighbour country. Spain is not a neighbour - but they and France also got in major trouble in early March. All other nations share a border with Italy. Population in millions Spain 46,7, Germany 83,2 , Austria 8,7, Switzerland 8,7, Slovenia 2, Italy 60,5, France 65,3 China is far away and who knows what they do in that dictatorship, but the richest region in Italy and hospitals completely overwhelmed ? (and then at the brink of officially applying triage). Unprecedented measures like a nation wide lockdown were - finally - deemed necessary ? That was another thing. Mass testing wasn't in place in early March in any of the European countries (well done Taiwan and South Korea) - so lockdown was the only other tool they realistically had. They were lucky if they had PPE for medical staff. Italy had tried to get away with half measures in February. Still allowing the Carneval in Venice and tourism. Then only shutting down the most affected region around Milano. But people could leave to avoid the restrictions, so those who could - affluent, urban, could work online, had vacations homes in italy or elsewhere - left. Spreading it even more in Italy and into other countries. In China the military secured Wuhan, and they did not give a warning, so people could not evade being kept in place. Italy had the bad fortune to be first in Europe, the scary example for others to learn from. They hesistated to take the decisive, unpopular disruptive, but necessary measures early on, and paid a high price. It is understandable, and very few nations would have done better. Taiwan and SK had been burned in former outbreaks, their wisdom was hard won, too.
    1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. That media persons and people online or in real life switched their argments to: "Even if it only saves one life ... " has no bearing on how the GOVERNMENT is supposed to MANAGE a PANDEMIC and COMMUNICATE around it. Giving correct info (the best available info at that point), helpful and plausible advice, getting the population on board is (in the U.S. should be) part of navigating the situation by government and their experts. Media, laypersons and think tanks may utter their own theories. The president has the bully pulpit. He could have dominated the discussion. He did not do that - Trump he is an idiot and is panicked by the idea that he cannot bullshit his way out of this one. Trump run successfully as outsider in 2016, That does not work for the sitting president. He has to find WEDGE ISSUS - and he has the gall to make mask wearing one of them. Plus Republicans hat the idea to bail out the regular people and smaller biz, bailouts are only for the big donors. With schools closed they would have to do something for the parents that are forced to stay home (smaller children). Obama handled Ebola - and the clickbait reporting, "when it bleeds it leads" and "breaking news" UNculture was also very unhelpful. Idiots (Republican politicians) made political hay of it. (Like trying to be smarter than Doctor w/o Borders regarding necessary quarantine measures. Arresting returning heros. The very persons who did the dangerous work to help contain it in Africa for the good of all nations ! Ebola can be contained but you need a modern medical system and logistics. Had the wealthy nations responded to the calls for help earlier it would never have spread that much. But once the Western governments could be bothered D w/o B were among those who saved the day. Would these doctors and nurses (who are by no stretch of the imagination highly paid) be reckless to spread in the U.S. after they had helped to contain it in Africa ? Would they be clueless what to do ? the same persons that "got this" in Africa under much more difficult and hard conditions ?- It just so happened that some republicans detected their inner ebola expert a few days before elections in Nov. Obama handled it despite the nonsense by mainstream media. I think CNN wall to wall coverage, and Faux Infotainement with the usual nonsense. Some improvising now with corona (and course correcting) is inevitable. You cannot afford to let it spread (there is a reason it became a PANDEMIC = contagious), but that is usually a major way to get more insights in medicine. Especially if you cannot run studies with controlled conditions (how do you simulate how lay persons handle hand hygiene and or wearing a mask, which they do often incorrectly so with reduced protection. Or the many setups of A/C and ventilation in buildings of all sizes. Usually after years you can try to do some very large studies taking the real population and real outcomes. the nurses studies are in the U.S. are a good example. Ten of thousands of nurses and they watch outcomes over decades. it gives insights but it takes loooooong. You cannot let corona spread like in Italy and China and the ... see what happens. Now and in 10 years (permanent damage of survivors). Experts and politicians will and must err on the side of caution. If they get it wrong it will end really badly. See China in January, and Italy in Feburary. After the first goal is reached, strategic testing (some random, most contact testing) helps to NIP IT IN THE BUD. Under these conditions it is possible to MAINTAIN A FRAGILE BALANCE. See Europe, or Canada, or Australia. Incl. lockdown in Melbourne. Not in the U.S., U.K. because the response never was decisive enough. Half baked does not work with a pandemic. And Sweden because they had a different approach. Which cost them around 5,000 additional dead people (if you compare them with their neighbour countries. Their economy doesn't do any better, they export a lot, and THEY are missing out on tourism. While most European countries have tourists. There was a travel warning until July.
    1
  27. 1