
San Francisco declares state of emergency to prepare for coronavirus - wglb
https://www.businessinsider.com/san-francisco-state-of-emergency-coronavirus-covid19-outbreak-2020-2#the-citys-tech-conference-scene-has-also-taken-a-hit-1
======
fluxsauce
While the sensationalist headline is technically accurate, both the headline
and the linked article bury the intent and context of the declaration. In
short, don't panic.

[https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-mayor-
London-...](https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-mayor-London-Breed-
declares-state-of-emergency-15083811.php)

> There have been no confirmed coronavirus cases in San Francisco to date, but
> as infections continue to rise across the world, “we need to allocate more
> resources to make sure we are prepared,” Breed said at a press conference
> announcing the emergency declaration.

> “To be clear, this declaration of emergency is all about preparedness. By
> declaring a state of emergency we are prioritizing the safety of our
> communities by being prepared.”

~~~
koheripbal
I feel like the debate between the "don't panic" crowd and the "preppers" is a
useless semantic debate between extremists.

You want to react the _appropriate_ amount. For the time being, you should go
about your normal routine, but like the CDC said today, you should _prepare_
for some major lifestyle disruptions.

~~~
iliveinchina
I can comment on a couple unexpected shortages we've seen in Asia: toilet
paper, due to panic buying, and hand sanitizer.

There are also some concerns about medicines unrelated to the virus because
many meds are produced in China and the supply chain here is all screwed up.
So some might consider getting medicine refills for 30 days (or however long
your insurance will let you) in advance. You also might not want to have to go
wait in line at a pharmacy during a pandemic.

In terms of work: it may make sense to start thinking about what kind of work
can be done efficiently remotely vs. on-site.

You also may want to think about finances in case the world sees a significant
economic contraction. If lots of countries replicate what has happened in
China, the world economy will be highly disrupted for at least a couple
months.

~~~
asdfasgasdgasdg
Super useful comment. R.e. toilet paper, random observation: buy a bidet and
you basically won't need to buy tp very much any more. They are very
inexpensive at least in the states. You can get one for $20 or so.

~~~
AstralStorm
Hopefully you have running water. I'd still recommend keeping some TP in case
water goes out in toilet.

~~~
asdfasgasdgasdg
Yep, we have a backup supply. That said if there's no running water for a
prolonged period we are eventually going to start having other problems. Fwiw
I don't think that is an anticipated outcome even of a global covid-19
pandemic.

------
asiachick
Whether or not this turns into a real pandemic I'm really curious how the
world survives a real one in the sense of all the disruption.

Sure some desk based jobs can be done at home but it seems like nearly every
restaurant, bar, and store would likely go out of business. As would airlines,
trains, maybe hotels. Grocery stores would have to go 100% delivery only?
Maybe be open 24/7 so people can spread out? Or would I need to wear a hazmat
suit to get food? Note: there was a family riding the bullet train in cheap
hazmat suits a few days ago.

I really have no idea. I suppose you can look at cities in China and see a
full response.

I see lots of people saying "prepare" but then list having a week of supplies.
Seem more like you'd need 6 to 12 months of supplies. Unlike an earthquake a
pandemic would hopefully not stop the water flow or electricity like say an
earthquake might but conversely it will be much longer before it's declared
safe to return to any normal routine.

~~~
mikekchar
As much as I hate to say it like this, a pandemic is only going to kill
something like 5% of the population at the top end. The Spanish flu in 1918
infected 500 million people, which was 27% of the population (according to
Wikipedia). The death toll was about 40-50 million (possibly up to 100 million
at worst). It was one of the most deadly worldwide infections in the history
of the world, but probably killed less than 3% of the population.

A pandemic is going to severely hurt the economy, but it won't completely stop
it. It will not be the case that nothing will be produced for months on end.
People _will_ go to work. Farmers _will_ produce food. There _will_ be shops.
But things will also be in short supply. Prices will probably rise. Poor
people will be hit harder and there will probably be some famine (or at least
more than there is now). But things will still continue.

In an event like an earthquake, entire distribution lines are shut down
because you can't physically get somewhere. With a pandemic, things will be in
short supply because labour is in short supply.

~~~
e_proxus
> Poor people will be hit harder and there will probably be some famine

I wonder how the extreme wealth distribution today will affect this. Although
looking at statistics [1] it seems it was even worse in 1922 (no numbers for
1918).

[1]:
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth)

------
wiseleo
San Francisco has Moscone Center. One unlucky unscreened attendee and good bye
world. Skipping all conventions until all clear.

------
tebuevd
It's only a matter of time before this becomes a massive problem for the city.
I applaud UCSF for not letting the two patients from Santa Clara start a local
outbreak.

------
pmoriarty
It boggles the mind that there was absolutely no mention of COVID-19
preparedness at the recent Democratic debates, and that Trump's been trying to
significantly cut the budget of the CDC.

Our leaders have their heads buried in the sand.

At least SF is trying to prepare.

~~~
IvyMike
> absolutely no mention of COVID-19 preparedness at the recent Democratic
> debates

I guess you are referring to an older debate but here is what they said on the
subject tonight.

[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-debate-
coronavirus-o...](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-debate-coronavirus-
outbreak-democrats-how-they-would-respond/)

