First 6 articles of the forum debate issue of @DevandChg that I am editing, on Social Policy under the Global Shadow of Right-wing Populism, online early and some open access. Fascinating stuff:
1. they draw a line at 1980 for "the year most SAPs were signed". This confuses stabilisation lending for BoP problems, which was ongoing throughout the "progressive era", esp '70s, with the "neoliberal SAPs", which only started in the early 80s, especially after the 1982 crisis.
We would only expect to see the effects of SAPs after the early '80s, esp from ~'83 onwards. Yet > half the income reduction in their figure happens before this, reinforcing the argument of many econs that SAPs followed the crisis, not the other way around (eg see many replies).
"the avg county-lvl death rate from Covid-19 is 12/100,000 people. Counties with a Black pop above 85% had a rate up to 10x higher. For every 10% pt increase in a county’s Black population, its Covid-19 death rate roughly doubles.”
"The reason why [Black people] face higher death rates is not bc they have higher rates of uninsured, poverty, diabetes, or these other factors.” … [or not explained by age, sex, comorbidities, and income]
That leaves other factors: systemic racism.
“Systemic racism that affects the quality of insurance African Americans have and the quality of the health care they receive.
...The correlation between death rate and driving to work suggests that just being at work, no matter how you get there, increases your risk of dying”
"Black people make up the majority of low-wage workers who remain on the frontlines in positions that don’t permit them.. to work from hom.. paid sick leave, or.. PPE."
@statnews Thanks to a history of redlining and race-based residential segregation, many of these low-wage workers are living in close, cramped housing that makes social distancing all but impossible. On top of this...
@statnews a dearth of federal- and state-level racial and ethnic data on Covid-19 cases and deaths continues to devalue the humanity of Black Americans and leave us in the dark about the true impacts of this pandemic on our communities — all while...
So, I must repeat: Belgian numbers incl suspected untested cases, mostly in care homes, which acct for ~1/2 deaths (2/3 yesterday). The other countries on the list do not. 1/n
So you would need to maybe double the numbers of the others to make comparable.
It is in fact a reflection of strength of the Belgian health system, not an indictment of it, that these cases are reported and that the system is also transparent and honest about them. 2/n
As noted here, Belgium is not overestimating deaths, but the other countries are underestimating: plus.lesoir.be/295071/article…
More generally, this is a classic stat reporting bias with better functioning systems, that report more because they are functioning well. 3/n
@statnews@MSF says price of remdesivir is unknown. "However, as the drug entered clinical trials in China for Covid-19 in Feb, it was estd that Gilead may charge $260/treatment-course in the country. Prices may be as high as $1,000/treatment-course in the US.” economictimes.indiatimes.com/https://econom…
It is perturbing that Belgium has a gd quality health system, w ICU that is well < capacity, no dramatic shortages of PPE, and yet we still have 3rd highest fatalities per cap in the world, trailing just behind Italy and Spain by a few days...
Of course, this is partly because Belgium is much more transparent with reporting non-hospital deaths, unlike eg Netherlands. Only 54% of deaths were in hospital, so this leads to very significant diffs in reporting. Belgian testing is also 50% > Netherlands; 70% > UK.
Wallonian/Flemish diffs also interesting. Wallonia and Brussels much quicker with reporting non-hospital deaths, whereas some of the big jumps in recent days have been bc of accumulated lagged reporting of deaths from Flemish care homes, which have been much slower w reporting.