Beware of Doug said:

---

fig96 said:

---

Beware of Doug said:

---

HotardAg07 said:

---

Interesting

---

Saying those graphs are the same or similar is just stupid.

---

It doesn't say the graphs are the same. It says the two cities have nearly the exact same adjustment in driving, walking, and transit use, and they're at most a 2% difference from each other.

---

Look at the driving line, Sweden bottoms out at around ~33%, Nashville at 70%. Just because the lines might intersect at a point doesn't mean they are similar. At some point in the last few years I attained the same muscle mass of Randy Macho Man Savage. It doesn't mean we are similar, it just means he has been decomposing for 9 years.


Also, I have worked in both towns, and the entire comparing of Nashville and Stockholm is just silly. One is on archipelago which changes a lot of how you travel in and out of the city. Sweden also goes through a big transformation of activity from March to May as they go from no day light and freezing, to a ton of day light. Also comparing a European country and Tennessee on biking habits is like comparing the swimming habits of a duck and a cinder block.

---

Beware of Doug said:

---

Quote:

---

Ok...it still doesn't say the graphs are the same.

It's saying the percentage change in people's habits is almost identical, which it is.

---

Thanks for clearing that up Kellyanne

---

fig96 said:

---

Beware of Doug said:

---

fig96 said:

---

Beware of Doug said:

---

HotardAg07 said:

---

Interesting

---

Saying those graphs are the same or similar is just stupid.

---

It doesn't say the graphs are the same. It says the two cities have nearly the exact same adjustment in driving, walking, and transit use, and they're at most a 2% difference from each other.

---

Look at the driving line, Sweden bottoms out at around ~33%, Nashville at 70%. Just because the lines might intersect at a point doesn't mean they are similar. At some point in the last few years I attained the same muscle mass of Randy Macho Man Savage. It doesn't mean we are similar, it just means he has been decomposing for 9 years.


Also, I have worked in both towns, and the entire comparing of Nashville and Stockholm is just silly. One is on archipelago which changes a lot of how you travel in and out of the city. Sweden also goes through a big transformation of activity from March to May as they go from no day light and freezing, to a ton of day light. Also comparing a European country and Tennessee on biking habits is like comparing the swimming habits of a duck and a cinder block.

---

Ok...it still doesn't say the graphs are the same.

It's saying the percentage change in people's habits is almost identical, which it is.

---

NASAg03 said:

---

fig96 said:

---

Beware of Doug said:

---

fig96 said:

---

Beware of Doug said:

---

HotardAg07 said:

---

Interesting

---

Saying those graphs are the same or similar is just stupid.

---

It doesn't say the graphs are the same. It says the two cities have nearly the exact same adjustment in driving, walking, and transit use, and they're at most a 2% difference from each other.

---

Look at the driving line, Sweden bottoms out at around ~33%, Nashville at 70%. Just because the lines might intersect at a point doesn't mean they are similar. At some point in the last few years I attained the same muscle mass of Randy Macho Man Savage. It doesn't mean we are similar, it just means he has been decomposing for 9 years.


Also, I have worked in both towns, and the entire comparing of Nashville and Stockholm is just silly. One is on archipelago which changes a lot of how you travel in and out of the city. Sweden also goes through a big transformation of activity from March to May as they go from no day light and freezing, to a ton of day light. Also comparing a European country and Tennessee on biking habits is like comparing the swimming habits of a duck and a cinder block.

---

Ok...it still doesn't say the graphs are the same.

It's saying the percentage change in people's habits is almost identical, which it is.

---

The final percentage numbers are almost identical, and that's it. That's only because you have no idea where they got those numbers from. Averages? Over what span? Single data points taken May 1? Compared to what past point?

Those plots have the same trend. No ***** Both cities slowed down. But the Nashville plot is vastly different. It also showed much greater swings prior to lock-down, and during the middle of lockdown. Why didn't they mention those extremes, or compare percentages from selected weeks at the extremes? That would have told a way different story.

The changes are similar, but the habits and extremes of those changes are not identical in the least bit.

---

oragator said:

---

Was just looking at the numbers for Stockholm, their death rate is around .15 across the population. That is higher than the state of NY, but less than NYC. And that's in a city of less than a million people, it isn't exactly densely populated by US standards. It has 13k people per square mile, NYC has 27k.
Not sure that's a ballpark very many would be comfortable in.

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Sweden certainly seems to have a lot more deaths than immediate neighbors Finland and Norway.

So how in the end is somebody going to grade whether Sweden economically fared worse or better than Finland or Norway, making the 5X+ extra deaths that they incurred 'worth it'? Come back a year from now and look at unemployment rates, GDP retraction in 2020 compared to 2019, increased national debt?

---

NASAg03 said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Sweden certainly seems to have a lot more deaths than immediate neighbors Finland and Norway.

So how in the end is somebody going to grade whether Sweden economically fared worse or better than Finland or Norway, making the 5X+ extra deaths that they incurred 'worth it'? Come back a year from now and look at unemployment rates, GDP retraction in 2020 compared to 2019, increased national debt?

---

In the end, we'll have numbers included from second waves, and watching Finland and Norway spike when they open up. We'll also have death numbers due to lockdown and not directly caused from contracting the virus (avoiding medical care for non-covid health issues).

And even if Sweden does have more deaths, they can quite easily compare deaths to quality of life and economics and personal well-being, as just that's already done for everything else in life that requires a balance between those things: speed limits, traffic signs and indicators, gun control, extreme sports, living in areas of frequent natural disasters, dangerous jobs, etc.

---

California Ag 90 said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

NASAg03 said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Sweden certainly seems to have a lot more deaths than immediate neighbors Finland and Norway.

So how in the end is somebody going to grade whether Sweden economically fared worse or better than Finland or Norway, making the 5X+ extra deaths that they incurred 'worth it'? Come back a year from now and look at unemployment rates, GDP retraction in 2020 compared to 2019, increased national debt?

---

In the end, we'll have numbers included from second waves, and watching Finland and Norway spike when they open up. We'll also have death numbers due to lockdown and not directly caused from contracting the virus (avoiding medical care for non-covid health issues).

And even if Sweden does have more deaths, they can quite easily compare deaths to quality of life and economics and personal well-being, as just that's already done for everything else in life that requires a balance between those things: speed limits, traffic signs and indicators, gun control, extreme sports, living in areas of frequent natural disasters, dangerous jobs, etc.

---

Compare quality of life for only a short-term period? Finland and Norway are not going to stay quarantined permanently. Finland for example has announced they are reopening schools starting May 13, and restaurants and theatres and so forth starting June 1, seems will basically be reopened back to same state as Sweden is within another month.

Say Finland doesn't have any significant 'second wave' of COVID. They shutdown completely though for 3 months unlike Sweden, and had about 20% of the total deaths per capita that Sweden did during that period. So the average Swedish person having restaurants and bars and schools open during March, April, & May of 2020 would still have been worth the 5X more deaths? How do you price the tradeoff in something like this? It seems really difficult to do.

---

please comment as well on population density in each country, given your affinity for statistics i'd welcome your views on that as well.

you seem to fully attribute differences in fatality rates to public policy, ignoring very different population densities in each of the three countries.

---

twk said:

---

A little more on Sweden's economic situation:

Quote:

---

Official figures show the country's economy shrank by just 0.3pc in the first three months of 2020, a far smaller decline than most forecasters and its central bank expected. The Riksbank had pencilled in a drop of between 0.8pc and 1.8pc.

The smaller scale of the fall contrasts with record slumps seen elsewhere across the Eurozone over the quarter as governments imposed much more stringent measures. France's economy tumbled 5.8pc, Italy's 4.7pc and Spain's by 5.2pc, while the Eurozone's output overall sank by 3.8pc - the worst decline in its history. The figures are likely to be far worse in the second quarter as lockdowns grind on.

---

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/05/05/light-touch-sweden-suffers-smaller-growth-hit-coronavirus/

No doubt, the Swedish economy will suffer from the huge drop in worldwide demand, but they clearly have fared better than everyone else. If the US had taken a similar approach, it would have been beneficial for not only the US, but the entire world economy.

Their biggest failure on the health front, as mentioned, has been in nursing homes, which are proving troublesome everywhere (ask New York about that). While their numbers don't look as good as their closest neighbors, they are in line with much of Europe. It is fair to point out that the Swedes didn't just stand around and do nothing, but the point is that the government took some calculated risks (such as keeping elementary schools and restaurants open) that appear not to have resulted in a health catastrophe by any objective measure. You can argue that they fared worse than their closest neighbors, but they managed to avoid overwhelming their health care system while minimizing the damage to the economy.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:
Personal spending in Denmark is down 66 percent and in Finland it stands at 70 percent, compared to only 30 percent in Sweden. Unemployment claims in Norway are rising four times as fast as those in Sweden.

---

PJYoung said:

---

DadHammer said:

---

Also Norway and Finland are not counting the elderly deaths the same as Sweden lowering their death numbers dramatically.

---

Not doubting you but can you cite a source on that?

---

DadHammer said:

---

PJ it's in several of the articles published in this thread but I don't feel like looking it up again. I read it in at least three independent articles. When I run across it again I will post it for you.

---

UTExan said:

---

Quote:

---

Not a model for others

Despite many around the world looking upon Sweden's approach as a route out of restrictive lockdowns, Goldman analysts warn it cannot be copied like-for-like. That's because of the relatively unique demographics in Sweden.

"Its population density is about half that of Italy, and Sweden has a high proportion of single-occupancy households, and a relatively low proportion of multi-generational households. The Swedish experience therefore cannot be extrapolated to support a swift reopening elsewhere," said Goldman.

Even Swedish authorities themselves caution against returning everyday life to normal too soon. The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) warned of an increase in cases if citizens do not keep following government guidance. "There is a significant risk that people start to relax prematurely and stop following guidelines. Continue to follow the authorities' advice and be part of the solution," said Svante Werger, special adviser at MSB, to Aftonbladet.

---

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/05/06/swedens-coronavirus-approach-not-a-model-to-copy-warns-goldman-sachs/#1260419c2aac

---

Mordred said:

---

twk said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

DadHammer said:

---

Also Norway and Finland are not counting the elderly deaths the same as Sweden lowering their death numbers dramatically.

---

Not doubting you but can you cite a source on that?

---

---

Not exactly on point, since I don't see any references to Denmark, Norway or Finland, but does address some of the issues:

The challenge of counting COVID-19 deaths

Sweden is shown as attributing 90% of excess deaths above normal to coronavirus, which is rather high compared to other countries.

---

Just to clarify because I'm not exactly sure what you're saying. What that article says is that Sweden is only counting "All deaths in and outside of hospitals of patients who have tested positive for COVID-19." And then Politico is saying that accounts for 90% of the excess deaths reported.

What it does means is that Sweden's testing and counting is probably pretty accurate, and not that they are artificially inflating counts.

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

California Ag 90 said:

---

please comment as well on population density in each country, given your affinity for statistics i'd welcome your views on that as well.

you seem to fully attribute differences in fatality rates to public policy, ignoring very different population densities in each of the three countries.

---

To be clear, I am not sure where my opinion lies on what Sweden did.

My primary question is how are folks actually going to ultimately grade whether what they did was 'right' compared to what Finland and Norway did.

People on both sides of the argument seem to be making a lot of assumptions, that Sweden will have a huge outbreak overwhelming healthcare system ( has not happened yet), or that Finland and Norway will have a much higher chance of a 'second wave' (who knows if that will happen). The economies of all three countries are getting hammered but presumably Sweden's less damaged In the short term than if they had done a full shutdown like their neighbors, but whether there is any notable economic benefit Sweden has a year from now compared to Finland/Norway because they never did a fully restrictive quarantine during the period March to May 2020, who knows.

---

UTExan said:

---

Quote:

---

Not a model for others

Despite many around the world looking upon Sweden's approach as a route out of restrictive lockdowns, Goldman analysts warn it cannot be copied like-for-like. That's because of the relatively unique demographics in Sweden.

"Its population density is about half that of Italy, and Sweden has a high proportion of single-occupancy households, and a relatively low proportion of multi-generational households. The Swedish experience therefore cannot be extrapolated to support a swift reopening elsewhere," said Goldman.

Even Swedish authorities themselves caution against returning everyday life to normal too soon. The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) warned of an increase in cases if citizens do not keep following government guidance. "There is a significant risk that people start to relax prematurely and stop following guidelines. Continue to follow the authorities' advice and be part of the solution," said Svante Werger, special adviser at MSB, to Aftonbladet.

---

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/05/06/swedens-coronavirus-approach-not-a-model-to-copy-warns-goldman-sachs/#1260419c2aac

---