5 ms·

I think in principle hindering spread is much EASIER in the US than in South Korea. The US has a huge advantage in its low population density and spread out po

I think in principle hindering spread is much EASIER in the US than in South Korea. The US has a huge advantage in its low population density and spread out population. That slows down the spread of disease. Not to mention the advantage of a car centric society. In the US you can travel from A to B without exposing yourself to other people. Americans also mostly live in separate houses further reducing the risk of the spread of disease. All through human history population density has been a major contributor to pandemics. One can see e.g. how New York is much harder hit than LA. LA is low density housing and almost no public transport. Europe and Asia in contrast is almost all more like New York. IMHO that makes the success in South Korea more impressive not LESS. We see the same in Europe. The densely populated countries tend to be harder hit. E.g. Denmark has enacted equally strict measures as Norway sooner yet has twice the number of deaths. Norway has an advantage in being more like the US, having a relatively spread out population. I don't think the decentralization is the main problem at the moment. Germany is also decentralized. It is a federal republic like the US. However unlike the US, Germany has a cooperation oriented leadership where the central government listens to the leaders of the states and coordinate with them. In the US it seems to be all postering and blame game. It is very hard to evaluate the US results without taking into account its current disastrous leadership. The US is lead by a reality star. Germany is led by a former scientific researcher with a PhD in quantum chemistry. Should we be surprised why Germany is having the best results in the West, while the US is rapidly approaching the worst results? What saves the US is that there are numerous governors who are good leaders and to some degree counterweight the absurdity of the federal government. But seriously in what country does the President encourage riot in provinces of their own country? Looking from abroad the US is looking increasingly like a Banana republic. I how things work out fine for everybody. But I am worried.

misun78 7y ago
I hope you are not including Cuomo — the governer at the epicenter of the worst hit NY — in your “list of good governers”? This was his quote from early March: "People are reacting like this is the Ebola virus. This is not the Ebola virus. This hysteria that you see, this fear that you see, the panic that you see is unwarranted. We have dealt with worse viruses. This spreads like the flu, but most people will have it and they get on with their lives."
- frosted-flakes 7y ago
  Yeah, he was wrong. But he's changed his tune, and has done a decently good job managing the situation.
  - misun78 7y ago
    As again with political analysis, I am seeing downright inconsistencies and biases in judging responses to this pandemic, based on what side one is on. Do you apply the same remarks to the POTUS as well?
    - frosted-flakes 7y ago
      Responding to your original post: > Not to make this too political but can't the same logic be applied to the POTUS too? Changed tone and done a decent job using the fed muscle to beef up on ventilators and testing. What am I missing when I hear contradicting analysis around politicians, presumably based on which "side" one is on. We should be consistent in acknowledging that no one (at least in the US) got the severity of this correct. The same logic does apply to President Trump. But he has not changed his tune. He's done some of the right things under pressure, but then goes and says that he wants to re-open the country by Easter, etc. I don't follow what he says closely (after all, I don't live in the US), but the picture I've gotten about him is that he's inconsistent and not really trustworthy.
      - bkor 7y ago
        > then goes and says that he wants to re-open the country by Easter From what I noticed (it's been a while) the reporting on that was a bit weird. The statement was more like "I hope it'll be fine by Easter". That's still a weird thing to say, but less strange than what was reported. The way statements were made to the public seems to be different per country. E.g. in NL the prime minister said something like "we need to take this very seriously and it will take a long time". They showed a similar presentation from France, were the statement included stuff about "fighting a war". So despite needing to say similar things, the messaging can differ quite a bit per country. In US the statements seem quite strange; dismissing the importance as authority figure seems dangerous and irresponsible.

misun78 7y ago

I hope you are not including Cuomo — the governer at the epicenter of the worst hit NY — in your “list of good governers”? This was his quote from early March: "People are reacting like this is the Ebola virus. This is not the Ebola virus. This hysteria that you see, this fear that you see, the panic that you see is unwarranted. We have dealt with worse viruses. This spreads like the flu, but most people will have it and they get on with their lives."

frosted-flakes 7y ago
Yeah, he was wrong. But he's changed his tune, and has done a decently good job managing the situation.
- misun78 7y ago
  As again with political analysis, I am seeing downright inconsistencies and biases in judging responses to this pandemic, based on what side one is on. Do you apply the same remarks to the POTUS as well?
  - frosted-flakes 7y ago
    Responding to your original post: > Not to make this too political but can't the same logic be applied to the POTUS too? Changed tone and done a decent job using the fed muscle to beef up on ventilators and testing. What am I missing when I hear contradicting analysis around politicians, presumably based on which "side" one is on. We should be consistent in acknowledging that no one (at least in the US) got the severity of this correct. The same logic does apply to President Trump. But he has not changed his tune. He's done some of the right things under pressure, but then goes and says that he wants to re-open the country by Easter, etc. I don't follow what he says closely (after all, I don't live in the US), but the picture I've gotten about him is that he's inconsistent and not really trustworthy.
    - bkor 7y ago
      > then goes and says that he wants to re-open the country by Easter From what I noticed (it's been a while) the reporting on that was a bit weird. The statement was more like "I hope it'll be fine by Easter". That's still a weird thing to say, but less strange than what was reported. The way statements were made to the public seems to be different per country. E.g. in NL the prime minister said something like "we need to take this very seriously and it will take a long time". They showed a similar presentation from France, were the statement included stuff about "fighting a war". So despite needing to say similar things, the messaging can differ quite a bit per country. In US the statements seem quite strange; dismissing the importance as authority figure seems dangerous and irresponsible.