4 ms·

This assumes that people will proactively leave, instead of just not caring, until such a point in time when it may be too late for them personally. It also kin

This assumes that people will proactively leave, instead of just not caring, until such a point in time when it may be too late for them personally. It also kinda assumes that even if people were to leave, that the state would realize the error of its ways. Which is quite optimistic, because there’s many cases where it’s rather easy to measure the negative impact of a policy, and then watch the policy makers use those negative impacts as a basis for further negative-impacting policy. It also seems this advice would really only help people who had the economic freedom to arbitrarily choose where they live and work.

walterbell 7y ago
The virus has shown that a relatively small number of humans wielding incorrect models (disproven in mere weeks!) were able to influence the leaders of hundreds of millions of people. After the first human ran a four-minute mile, that feat was repeated by other humans. Don't underestimate the lessons learned by the non-winners of the last two months. More than a few HN readers could work from home and people in some states are about to make very different choices from their neighbors in other states. Time will tell who wins. If you listen to the rhetoric, it is claimed that some will literally die because of the policy choices of their governor. It is true that past behavior does not support the migration theory, but the near future does not (sadly) look much like the past.