We have close to mass hysteria at the moment on number of cases & deaths that are tiny to where the implication are that this is heading.
Maybe my maths & thinking are all nonsense but are there not just two options. Both with exceptionally bad implications even if containment works.
Option 1 - Eradicate the virus.
* Lock down & containment, and coming to the world?
* If it’s a complete success the result is a massive drop in supply & demand globally from the lock downs.
* What if it doesn’t, continued lock downs, continually, until it's contained?
Or
* Acceptance it cant be contained & then we need to move to heard immunity.
Option 2 - Herd Immunity
* Lets say 70% of the UK to get it = 46,000,000
* So let's assume, somehow the sombrero is squashed & that’s 1,000,000 a month.
* That's 4 years of a sustained infection rate of 1 million per month.
* OK, 1m per month too much, so say 500k, 8 years…you get the thinking.
The point is these numbers are so hugely different to todays small numbers.
The key question is what is the ideal, or sustainable number of infections. 1m a month is 4 years of this process.
We already have near mass hysteria with Italy running at 3500 per day, to achieve 1m per month that’s 33,000 per day!
So for me, when we start to look at the numbers now compared with what they would need to be if the virus is not contained, we are miles away from reality.
The economic & social impact of the world running at 60% infection rate over many years is almost impossible to comprehend.
Alternatively the action required to contain the virus, ie weeks, and months of lock downs across the world is similarly hard to really grasp.
So, I remember a saying about being stuck in a traffic jam ‘what the hell is all this traffic, you are the traffic’. Maybe I am part of the hysteria.
I have a bear market plan, to scale in, which I have been doing a little of as we are down 30%, but this situation feels very different. The duration of the impact could be years & the impact huge, global…
