6 ms·

> there are rational goals to quarantines beyond keeping the hospitals occupied at an optimal level None of the counties in the San Francisco Bay Area have bee

> there are rational goals to quarantines beyond keeping the hospitals occupied at an optimal level None of the counties in the San Francisco Bay Area have been willing to outline any specific goals, nor has our Governor. If you can point me to anything more specific from the above than 'if we only save one life', I'd be shocked.

tptacek 7y ago
What's your point? Is there a statute you're thinking of that requires San Francisco to spell out specifically what their goals are? You said upthread that the lockdown is a violation of people's constitutional rights, but it seems clear that it isn't, at least not in our jurisprudence. You can find legal scholars debating the constitutionality of quarantine, but only in the context of hypothetical orders that haven't been issued by any state yet that would imprison people in their homes (the way China apparently did). If you don't even have the broad strokes of this right, it seems fair to ask for a citation here.
- SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
  I require San Francisco to spell out what their goals are! I fundamentally reject the idea that it's our duty as citizens to shut up and do whatever London Breed thinks is best. If she's not willing to explain why these emergency restrictions are necessary and how we'll know when they aren't necessary, we shouldn't comply.
  - epicureanideal 7y ago
    Yes, even if this isn't required by the letter of the law, it certainly does seem to be required by the spirit of US law that the people are not mere subjects to be ordered around. At least in spirit, they deserve to be informed, so that they can make an informed decision about whether they believe their representatives are behaving reasonably. And if they don't agree, they can vote them out, or exercise their free speech rights to voice their dissatisfaction.
  - tptacek 7y ago
    Is there a statute somewhere that requires London Breed to spell anything out to your satisfaction? I don't know what California's emergency management laws look like; maybe you're right.
    - CPLX 7y ago
      Does there have to be a statute to advocate for a rational, numerical based approach to public policy? You're a super smart, analytical guy. You don't see any problem with imposing extremely restrictive rules on a population of millions without even a basic attempt to quantify what your desired outcome is?
      - jacquesm 7y ago
        Why do you want this to be a simple problem? It isn't a simple problem, not by a long shot and erring on the side of caution seems to be the right way to play this because you are at most 4 weeks away from a serious disaster if you fuck it up. The fact that SF does ok is a result of the shelter-in-place order, without it SF would look like NYC or worse.
        CPLX 7y ago
        Nobody said it was going to be simple. I'm just advocating that it not be completely and totally lacking in stated goals when it's such a severe policy intervention. Those goals could be complex, or detailed, or multivariate, or subject to contingencies and caveats. But they can't be non-existent and they can't be secret. This is a democracy. > The fact that SF does ok is a result of the shelter-in-place order, without it SF would look like NYC or worse. Your sentence here is making a quantitative assessment that the result is worse than NYC, without stating the metric you're using to arrive at that assessment, or hinting at the means by which it was arrived at. It's just "worse". That's fine for an forum comment. But it's a disaster as a government policy almost six weeks into this crisis. What's being criticized here is the parent story, which is a press release by the actual government, and appears to make no mention of the criteria used to arrive at this drastic and staggeringly expensive policy decision, and contains nary a hint of what metrics they'll use to evaluate it, or critically, determine if the schedule should be delayed or accelerated. That's crazy.

tptacek 7y ago

What's your point? Is there a statute you're thinking of that requires San Francisco to spell out specifically what their goals are? You said upthread that the lockdown is a violation of people's constitutional rights, but it seems clear that it isn't, at least not in our jurisprudence. You can find legal scholars debating the constitutionality of quarantine, but only in the context of hypothetical orders that haven't been issued by any state yet that would imprison people in their homes (the way China apparently did). If you don't even have the broad strokes of this right, it seems fair to ask for a citation here.

SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
I require San Francisco to spell out what their goals are! I fundamentally reject the idea that it's our duty as citizens to shut up and do whatever London Breed thinks is best. If she's not willing to explain why these emergency restrictions are necessary and how we'll know when they aren't necessary, we shouldn't comply.
- epicureanideal 7y ago
  Yes, even if this isn't required by the letter of the law, it certainly does seem to be required by the spirit of US law that the people are not mere subjects to be ordered around. At least in spirit, they deserve to be informed, so that they can make an informed decision about whether they believe their representatives are behaving reasonably. And if they don't agree, they can vote them out, or exercise their free speech rights to voice their dissatisfaction.
- tptacek 7y ago
  Is there a statute somewhere that requires London Breed to spell anything out to your satisfaction? I don't know what California's emergency management laws look like; maybe you're right.
  - CPLX 7y ago
    Does there have to be a statute to advocate for a rational, numerical based approach to public policy? You're a super smart, analytical guy. You don't see any problem with imposing extremely restrictive rules on a population of millions without even a basic attempt to quantify what your desired outcome is?
    - jacquesm 7y ago
      Why do you want this to be a simple problem? It isn't a simple problem, not by a long shot and erring on the side of caution seems to be the right way to play this because you are at most 4 weeks away from a serious disaster if you fuck it up. The fact that SF does ok is a result of the shelter-in-place order, without it SF would look like NYC or worse.
      - CPLX 7y ago
        Nobody said it was going to be simple. I'm just advocating that it not be completely and totally lacking in stated goals when it's such a severe policy intervention. Those goals could be complex, or detailed, or multivariate, or subject to contingencies and caveats. But they can't be non-existent and they can't be secret. This is a democracy. > The fact that SF does ok is a result of the shelter-in-place order, without it SF would look like NYC or worse. Your sentence here is making a quantitative assessment that the result is worse than NYC, without stating the metric you're using to arrive at that assessment, or hinting at the means by which it was arrived at. It's just "worse". That's fine for an forum comment. But it's a disaster as a government policy almost six weeks into this crisis. What's being criticized here is the parent story, which is a press release by the actual government, and appears to make no mention of the criteria used to arrive at this drastic and staggeringly expensive policy decision, and contains nary a hint of what metrics they'll use to evaluate it, or critically, determine if the schedule should be delayed or accelerated. That's crazy.