4 ms·

China and Europe have public healthcare and social safety. They've been much worse off than the US so far. I'm not saying that won't change, but to sit here and

China and Europe have public healthcare and social safety. They've been much worse off than the US so far. I'm not saying that won't change, but to sit here and shit all over America's approach to limited government is a premature celebration.

nomel 7y ago
> They've been much worse off than the US so far. I think this is a simplistic view. We're not only talking about infection rate here. edit: Social safety nets, medical debt, etc.
- dcftoapv 7y ago
  Okay, sure. Lets talk about fiscal. Italy's going go re-enter another sovereign debt crisis because they were already in recession before they shut down their entire economy. Lets talk about medical. I haven't heard anything about hospital bed shortages in the US yet. Again, not saying we won't get there, but China had to build entire new facilities because they didn't have adequate infrastructure. Lets talk about essentials. American stores might be temporarily out of toilet paper, but Wuhan is currently dealing with dramatic food shortages.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - ikiris 7y ago
    You seem to be missing both the growth rate curve and the time lag. If anything the US still has its head in the sand and is heading for 5-40 million deaths due to just swamping the hospital capacity for critical care.
    - dcftoapv 7y ago
      I'm not going to sit here and defend the US government's approach to this situation. Not producing test kits, not investing in additional medical supplies earlier, etc. Those were the wrong decision. That said. Italy basically denied having a problem until they couldn't anymore. China's safety net health system did everything they could to cover up the crisis until it exploded in their face. Other countries haven't been doing much more to prepare than the US. People like to hate on it, but the US government still functions are a comparatively high level while maintaining a degree of individual freedom that other countries do not.
guerrilla 7y ago
Premature for people incapable of deduction or what?
- SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
  It's knowable that the situation in the US will be comparably bad to what we're seeing in other countries. The original comment suggested that it'll be particularly bad in the US, and I think it requires a lot more than deduction to figure that.
  - vvanders 7y ago
    Considering the Seattle Flu Study had to violate the law[1] to get the first few confirmed cases in WA I don't have a lot of high hopes. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/seattle-flu-study-coronavirus-testing-washington-2020-3?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/seattle-flu-study-coronaviru...
  - guerrilla 7y ago
    I think you misread what the person I was respond to said. In any case, I also disagree that it takes much to know that the US is going to suffer particularly bad. If people don't have job security, they aren't going to stay home. If people don't have health care, they won't bother trying to access it. This will help spread the disease faster than the health care system can handle it. Furthermore, given poor education levels and (justified) distrust of the government, in most of the country, compliance is going to be low anyway. Time will tell.
jachee 7y ago
> so far. Those words are doing a lot of work. If we densely-packed city folk don't work extra-hard to contain this, it's going to absolutely raze our health, and other support systems.
harikb 7y ago
Let us not call it "America's approach to limited government". It does not represent the view of majoriry, just an influential minority. A better phrasing would be "America's approach to privatising profits and socialising costs"
- dcftoapv 7y ago
  It's been awhile since I looked at these stats but as of like 2008 more people identified as Republican than Democrat.
  - Cyberdog 7y ago
    What does identifying as a Republican have to do with small government anymore?
    - dcftoapv 7y ago
      Fair
    - arcticbull 7y ago
      Well, it has to do with running on an agenda of small government then making it bigger and less functional.
  - Retric 7y ago
    It’s been a while since that was true. Democrats have had a several percentage point lead for years. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/07/24/only-a-quarter-of-the-country-identifies-as-republican-there-are-two-reasons-the-party-keeps-winning-anyway/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/07/24/o... PS: It’s also irrelevant as many people identify as independents while actually voting overwhelmingly for a single party. Further, political power has nothing to do with the national popular vote let alone what the non voting public believes. For example Trump won with 46.1% of the popular vote and votes from about 19.5% of the total population. That’s simply how the system works and what shapes politics.
fiblye 7y ago
They’ve also had widespread infection for longer. China got a 3 month head start. It’s pointless to say one has an good outcome when it’s only now beginning to grow. And some countries like Japan have public health care. Despite being one of the first countries with widespread infection, they’re still far below America.
- big_chungus 7y ago
  China also has a wider set of options to violate the liberties of her citizens. That does come in handy some times, but we've decided we don't do that here. Japan is very, very different culturally, so it's quite hard to compare; she's also a small archipelago whereas America is a large landmass. It will also be interesting to see the court cases that come from what American governments have done so far; there's a serious case to be made for violations of our right to freely assemble. Even the time, place, and manner standard (which is still contested but is current precedent) may not cover such drastic curtailment of all public gatherings. Sadly, these things usually happen and get fought out in court later (see Japanese internment camps) when in some sort of crisis state, so I doubt constitutionality has any bearing on the pencil-pushers latest and greatest idea. Friendly reminder that, while I don't see any malicious intent in the current actions, these directives specifically sound disturbingly close to those issued by many an authoritarian government: > You cannot engage in group activities in person with others. > You cannot have dinner parties. You cannot invite friends over to your home to hang out. The precedent set today could be abused in the future, particularly precedent that looks like this.
  - Cyberdog 7y ago
    Thank you for making this argument more rationally than I am apparently capable of making it.
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    > Friendly reminder that, while I don't see any malicious intent in the current actions, these directives specifically sound disturbingly close to those issued by many an authoritarian government. And yet, China's number of active cases went from 81K to 9K in a few weeks.
post_below 7y ago
Their outbreaks started earlier. If we get off easy it will be because warmer temperatures or mutation play a part. Delayed testing, a disbanded pandemic response team, a president in denial for the first part of the outbreak, people not going to hospitals because they can't afford it... Do you sincerely think these things put the US on equal footing with the rest of the world in terms of responding to this?
- dcftoapv 7y ago
  Lets start with the things we probably agree on: - The US healthcare system is wildly inefficient - The US has certain societal advantages in dealing with this outbreak that China doesn't (i.e., we are more spread out, we are more likely to take individual transportation, etc.) - China has certain societal advantages in dealing with this outbreak that the US doesn't (i.e., they can order mass quarantines and mobilize people in a way that the US cannot) Keeping those in mind. Yes, we might get off easy. Yes, it might turn out worse for us. No, the outcome will not be 100% correlated to government effectiveness. That said, the US healthcare system still leads the world in research, funding, talent, etc. Is it more expensive? Yes. Is it the best system for public health? No, probably not. But we do have our own advantages. Immuno-suppressant therapies that are being used as a last resort for COVID 19 were developed by Genentech. Roche and Genentech are leading the way on development of a vaccine. The US healthcare system is home to some of the world's foremost experts on drug development and patient care. We are undoubtedly better off in dealing with this than many other countries. We're probably not the top percentile, but we are most definitely among the top 5-10%.

nomel 7y ago

> They've been much worse off than the US so far. I think this is a simplistic view. We're not only talking about infection rate here. edit: Social safety nets, medical debt, etc.

dcftoapv 7y ago
Okay, sure. Lets talk about fiscal. Italy's going go re-enter another sovereign debt crisis because they were already in recession before they shut down their entire economy. Lets talk about medical. I haven't heard anything about hospital bed shortages in the US yet. Again, not saying we won't get there, but China had to build entire new facilities because they didn't have adequate infrastructure. Lets talk about essentials. American stores might be temporarily out of toilet paper, but Wuhan is currently dealing with dramatic food shortages.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- ikiris 7y ago
  You seem to be missing both the growth rate curve and the time lag. If anything the US still has its head in the sand and is heading for 5-40 million deaths due to just swamping the hospital capacity for critical care.
  - dcftoapv 7y ago
    I'm not going to sit here and defend the US government's approach to this situation. Not producing test kits, not investing in additional medical supplies earlier, etc. Those were the wrong decision. That said. Italy basically denied having a problem until they couldn't anymore. China's safety net health system did everything they could to cover up the crisis until it exploded in their face. Other countries haven't been doing much more to prepare than the US. People like to hate on it, but the US government still functions are a comparatively high level while maintaining a degree of individual freedom that other countries do not.

guerrilla 7y ago

Premature for people incapable of deduction or what?

SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
It's knowable that the situation in the US will be comparably bad to what we're seeing in other countries. The original comment suggested that it'll be particularly bad in the US, and I think it requires a lot more than deduction to figure that.
- vvanders 7y ago
  Considering the Seattle Flu Study had to violate the law[1] to get the first few confirmed cases in WA I don't have a lot of high hopes. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/seattle-flu-study-coronavirus-testing-washington-2020-3?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/seattle-flu-study-coronaviru...
- guerrilla 7y ago
  I think you misread what the person I was respond to said. In any case, I also disagree that it takes much to know that the US is going to suffer particularly bad. If people don't have job security, they aren't going to stay home. If people don't have health care, they won't bother trying to access it. This will help spread the disease faster than the health care system can handle it. Furthermore, given poor education levels and (justified) distrust of the government, in most of the country, compliance is going to be low anyway. Time will tell.

jachee 7y ago

> so far. Those words are doing a lot of work. If we densely-packed city folk don't work extra-hard to contain this, it's going to absolutely raze our health, and other support systems.

harikb 7y ago

Let us not call it "America's approach to limited government". It does not represent the view of majoriry, just an influential minority. A better phrasing would be "America's approach to privatising profits and socialising costs"

dcftoapv 7y ago
It's been awhile since I looked at these stats but as of like 2008 more people identified as Republican than Democrat.
- Cyberdog 7y ago
  What does identifying as a Republican have to do with small government anymore?
  - dcftoapv 7y ago
    Fair
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    Well, it has to do with running on an agenda of small government then making it bigger and less functional.
- Retric 7y ago
  It’s been a while since that was true. Democrats have had a several percentage point lead for years. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/07/24/only-a-quarter-of-the-country-identifies-as-republican-there-are-two-reasons-the-party-keeps-winning-anyway/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/07/24/o... PS: It’s also irrelevant as many people identify as independents while actually voting overwhelmingly for a single party. Further, political power has nothing to do with the national popular vote let alone what the non voting public believes. For example Trump won with 46.1% of the popular vote and votes from about 19.5% of the total population. That’s simply how the system works and what shapes politics.

fiblye 7y ago

They’ve also had widespread infection for longer. China got a 3 month head start. It’s pointless to say one has an good outcome when it’s only now beginning to grow. And some countries like Japan have public health care. Despite being one of the first countries with widespread infection, they’re still far below America.

big_chungus 7y ago
China also has a wider set of options to violate the liberties of her citizens. That does come in handy some times, but we've decided we don't do that here. Japan is very, very different culturally, so it's quite hard to compare; she's also a small archipelago whereas America is a large landmass. It will also be interesting to see the court cases that come from what American governments have done so far; there's a serious case to be made for violations of our right to freely assemble. Even the time, place, and manner standard (which is still contested but is current precedent) may not cover such drastic curtailment of all public gatherings. Sadly, these things usually happen and get fought out in court later (see Japanese internment camps) when in some sort of crisis state, so I doubt constitutionality has any bearing on the pencil-pushers latest and greatest idea. Friendly reminder that, while I don't see any malicious intent in the current actions, these directives specifically sound disturbingly close to those issued by many an authoritarian government: > You cannot engage in group activities in person with others. > You cannot have dinner parties. You cannot invite friends over to your home to hang out. The precedent set today could be abused in the future, particularly precedent that looks like this.
- Cyberdog 7y ago
  Thank you for making this argument more rationally than I am apparently capable of making it.
- arcticbull 7y ago
  > Friendly reminder that, while I don't see any malicious intent in the current actions, these directives specifically sound disturbingly close to those issued by many an authoritarian government. And yet, China's number of active cases went from 81K to 9K in a few weeks.

post_below 7y ago

Their outbreaks started earlier. If we get off easy it will be because warmer temperatures or mutation play a part. Delayed testing, a disbanded pandemic response team, a president in denial for the first part of the outbreak, people not going to hospitals because they can't afford it... Do you sincerely think these things put the US on equal footing with the rest of the world in terms of responding to this?

dcftoapv 7y ago
Lets start with the things we probably agree on: - The US healthcare system is wildly inefficient - The US has certain societal advantages in dealing with this outbreak that China doesn't (i.e., we are more spread out, we are more likely to take individual transportation, etc.) - China has certain societal advantages in dealing with this outbreak that the US doesn't (i.e., they can order mass quarantines and mobilize people in a way that the US cannot) Keeping those in mind. Yes, we might get off easy. Yes, it might turn out worse for us. No, the outcome will not be 100% correlated to government effectiveness. That said, the US healthcare system still leads the world in research, funding, talent, etc. Is it more expensive? Yes. Is it the best system for public health? No, probably not. But we do have our own advantages. Immuno-suppressant therapies that are being used as a last resort for COVID 19 were developed by Genentech. Roche and Genentech are leading the way on development of a vaccine. The US healthcare system is home to some of the world's foremost experts on drug development and patient care. We are undoubtedly better off in dealing with this than many other countries. We're probably not the top percentile, but we are most definitely among the top 5-10%.