6 ms·

People here are missing why, exactly, the government wants to lock down the admittedly low-risk Tesla factory. It's about political sustainability. Right now,

People here are missing why, exactly, the government wants to lock down the admittedly low-risk Tesla factory. It's about political sustainability. Right now, the government has a simple story: essential businesses stay open, and everything else stays closed. It's quick to express and easily understandable. But as soon as the government starts picking and choosing "nonessential" businesses to allow to open, every single nonessential business will be clamoring for an allowance and emboldened to present themselves as heroic frontline workers. You'll see every nail salon in the state market themselves as paragons of safety and virtue, professionally run, basically cleaner than the best medical facilities in the world. And if the government allows Tesla and refuses nail salons/meat packing facilities/hookah bars, you'll have a large constituency who'll be pushing duplicitous but superficially plausible arguments like "Newsom loves his BigTech buddies like Elon Musk but hates everyday regular businesses like Tyson." The quarantine only has power so long as the public understands it and supports it, and the government has made the plausible assumption that picking and choosing nonessentials would undermine public understanding and enforcement of the quarantine more than the value that would come in allowing certain safe nonessential businesses to return to work.

AlexandrB 6y ago
This is exactly right and it's pretty disgusting for Musk to put his self-interest ahead of the public good. It's also disgusting that people are cheering him on. I don't think the US, as a nation, has the capacity for self-sacrifice that's required to contain a pandemic. At least not anymore. This is in strong contrast to previous global crises, like WWII.
- brandmeyer 6y ago
  It doesn't bode well for our response to global climate change, either.
  - eirini1 6y ago
    yeah we really are doomed unless drastic change comes to how these kinds of decisions are made and how they are enforced. The American middle-class didn't even want to stay at home for a few weeks to prevent an epidemic that could directly kill them. I highly doubt they will give up their suburban houses with air conditioning and their two luxury cars to move into an apartment in a big city and take public transport for the sake of the climate.
- downerending 6y ago
  Better to ask whether the US, as a nation, has the capacity to carefully consider the long-term ramifications of our various choices, and to choose the best option regardless of politics and mob sentiment. The cries of "if even one person dies, it's too many" ring hollow. We know large numbers will die. The question is how to minimize that number. There is no safety.
- streb-lo 6y ago
  Just my opinion, but the United States' aversion to any sort of collective nationhood or individual sacrifice is going to be its undoing. The problems we are facing are getting more complex and require greater co-operation, not less.
jayd16 6y ago
Agreed. Whats so hard to understand about laws applied uniformly? We can complain that there's no avenue for fast reopening of low risk non-essentials, but to complain that policy failure means the policy is "not evidence based" is myopic.
- scarmig 6y ago
  I kind of get it: you can imagine a world where the government offers a fine level of granularity specifying how and when different facilities in different industries can open, and that would be more "rational" than blanket prohibitions. But that ignores the actual process of policymaking: imagine a program that consists of thousands of lines of nested if-else statements, that gets a hundred PRs per day from devs implementing requirements from a dozen different PMs who aren't even necessarily communicating with each other or that knowledgeable about the actual product requirements, who also might be getting bribes to put in buggy code that happen to favor certain actors. Optimistically, even given all that you might be able to build a policy that generates more efficiencies than a whitelist of a couple sectors. Even if you can, though, you won't be able to effectively communicate the why of any particular decision to the public. So they get pissed off when you allow people to go to the beach on a sunny day to pop open a bottle of beer while you disallow in-person religious services.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
  This is basically my main complaint about the approach in the US. That ship has long sailed, but it should have been straight quarantine. We got soft 'shelter in place' that was basically disregarded based on what I saw ( in IL suburbs at least; can't speak for other places ) and not applied uniformly. And I don't even want to get started on our governor deciding that golfing is somehow essential to the quality of life here. In short, I understand the anger. I even understand the guy, who did not want to wear a mask out of spite at my wife's place ( more specifically, he did not want to wear it, because eff IL state government; he put it on when he was told it was office policy.. ). But it is getting messy and we better figure it out quick, before that powder cake gets lit. The opportunity to contain it has passed and now we really need to think hard what to do next, because options are not great.
gpm 6y ago
This argument would make more sense if tesla wasn't defined as essential by most relevant legal definitions of essential [0] - or at least portions of their business (solar panels) are and those portions were also shut down by the county. [0] Basically all of these include the federal governments list that can be found at the link below. This list explicitly includes the manufacture of solar panels amongst many other things. https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Version_3.0_CISA_Guidance_on_Essential_Critical_Infrastructure_Workers_4.pdf https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Versio... The only one relevant legal definition that doesn't, is Alameda county. But even they say "Businesses may also operate to manufacture distributed energy resource components, like solar panels." https://covid-19.acgov.org/covid19-assets/docs/5-4-20%20Alameda%20County%20SIP%20Order%20FAQ%205.9.20%2011%20AM.pdf https://covid-19.acgov.org/covid19-assets/docs/5-4-20%20Alam...
- harryh 6y ago
  The factory in Fremont manufactures cars not solar panels or grid batteries.
  - gpm 6y ago
    Are you sure? I have the impression (not sure from where) that it was both cars and solar. I'd also point out that the federal list includes the following, so most of my point stands either way > Workers critical to the manufacturing, [...] of vehicles
- scarmig 6y ago
  The list you provide is 20 pages of bullet points listing jobs that are supposedly essential. I actually have a hard time figuring out a job that wouldn't qualify as essential. Also, at the top of the document: > This list is advisory in nature. It is not, nor should it be considered, a federal directive or standard. Additionally, this advisory list is not intended to be the exclusive list of critical infrastructure sectors, workers, and functions that should continue during the COVID-19 response across all jurisdictions. Individual jurisdictions should add or subtract essential workforce categories based on their own requirements and discretion.
jameshart 6y ago
Just to clarify something that seems to be a point of confusion in the current reporting environment, since you mentioned Tyson and meatpacking in there...: Meat packing plants are essential businesses. They should be operating. State and local lockdown ordnances are not preventing them from doing so. The issue about meat packing plants being closed is not that they are being forced to shut by overzealous Democratic governors. They are being shut by their owners, insurers, and occasionally government actors, when - while trying to operate as an essential business - an outbreak of Covid starts to affect their workforce and makes continuing to operate too much of a public health and private liability risk. Everybody wants meatpacking plants to be open if it's possible to do so. The workers, the owners, the government, and people who like eating meat. But if it can't be done without exposing large numbers of meatpacking and meat supply chain workers to the risk of Sars-Cov-2 infection, then in spite of how essential they are particular plants are going to have to close. Now it is possible that Tesla will be able to open up and operate and not become a Covid hotspot. But there's definitely a risk that they will, just like the meatpacking plants did. And is that risk worth taking for luxury cars, rather than food?
- Waterluvian 6y ago
  Not that this affects what you're saying and it doesn't necessarily make for a practical srgument, but it sprang to mind. Do car parts in the supply chain go bad? What about livestock? Like can you literally just keep cattle and pigs and chicken alive longer if demand drops short term?
  - twblalock 6y ago
    Given the number of farms getting ready to kill their unsold livestock, the answer is no, you can't just keep them around. It costs money to keep livestock fed and healthy, and if they can't be sold then farmers lose money every day. Eventually the farmers need to prevent further losses by killing the animals.
  - bentpins 6y ago
    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/25/us/chickens-depopulated-delmarva-plants-delaware-maryland/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/25/us/chickens-depopulated-d... It's not really doable from what I've been seeing. The animals grow to big and living conditions worsen
twblalock 6y ago
> Right now, the government has a simple story: essential businesses stay open, and everything else stays closed. It's quick to express and easily understandable. That ship sailed a while ago. Home Depot is open and packed to the gills (literally people lining up to get in the front door at my neighborhood Home Depot which is about 20 minutes from the Tesla factory). Most of the people shopping there aren't doing anything essential -- their home improvement projects and gardens can wait. Similarly, marijuana dispensaries are still open in California. They aren't really essential: unlike in the case of alcohol, withdrawal from marijuana is not dangerous and smokers could go without it. Yet dispensaries are "essential". On the other hand, car parades and just "going for a drive" are officially discouraged even though there is no chance of contact with strangers when you are inside your car. At this point, to say that those businesses are essential, and yet a car factory is not, is plainly ridiculous. What kind of rational decision-making process results in marijuana dispensaries being more essential than car factories? The government can't get out of this by claiming it can't pick and choose, because it has already been picking and choosing for a while. It has given the green light to more questionable cases than the Tesla factory.
- read_if_gay_ 6y ago
  I think marijuana dispensaries are a weak example. There probably is a fair number of people who actually need their medical marijuana.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- camel_gopher 6y ago
  They are essential because people stay home and some up.
- watwut 6y ago
  > Home Depot is open and packed to the gills (literally people lining up to get in the front door at my neighborhood Home Depot which is about 20 minutes from the Tesla factory). Most of the people shopping there aren't doing anything essential -- their home improvement projects and gardens can wait Shops where I live mandate masks and either gloves or hand sanitizer. Also, people have to wait two meters from each other and only limited amount of people can be in at the same time. It seemed reasonable to me to allow shops like Home Depot if the above restrictions are hold. You are more likely to get Covid by prolonged contact then by brief one. And if they expect people to stay at home, it makes sense to allow them to do something with that time so they dont go crazy. Gardening and home restriction are reasonable, smart activities for lockdown.
concordDance 6y ago
I feel "the government" in the above post is conflating the local government and the state and federal governments in a very unhelpful way.

AlexandrB 6y ago

This is exactly right and it's pretty disgusting for Musk to put his self-interest ahead of the public good. It's also disgusting that people are cheering him on. I don't think the US, as a nation, has the capacity for self-sacrifice that's required to contain a pandemic. At least not anymore. This is in strong contrast to previous global crises, like WWII.

brandmeyer 6y ago
It doesn't bode well for our response to global climate change, either.
- eirini1 6y ago
  yeah we really are doomed unless drastic change comes to how these kinds of decisions are made and how they are enforced. The American middle-class didn't even want to stay at home for a few weeks to prevent an epidemic that could directly kill them. I highly doubt they will give up their suburban houses with air conditioning and their two luxury cars to move into an apartment in a big city and take public transport for the sake of the climate.
downerending 6y ago
Better to ask whether the US, as a nation, has the capacity to carefully consider the long-term ramifications of our various choices, and to choose the best option regardless of politics and mob sentiment. The cries of "if even one person dies, it's too many" ring hollow. We know large numbers will die. The question is how to minimize that number. There is no safety.
streb-lo 6y ago
Just my opinion, but the United States' aversion to any sort of collective nationhood or individual sacrifice is going to be its undoing. The problems we are facing are getting more complex and require greater co-operation, not less.

jayd16 6y ago

Agreed. Whats so hard to understand about laws applied uniformly? We can complain that there's no avenue for fast reopening of low risk non-essentials, but to complain that policy failure means the policy is "not evidence based" is myopic.

scarmig 6y ago
I kind of get it: you can imagine a world where the government offers a fine level of granularity specifying how and when different facilities in different industries can open, and that would be more "rational" than blanket prohibitions. But that ignores the actual process of policymaking: imagine a program that consists of thousands of lines of nested if-else statements, that gets a hundred PRs per day from devs implementing requirements from a dozen different PMs who aren't even necessarily communicating with each other or that knowledgeable about the actual product requirements, who also might be getting bribes to put in buggy code that happen to favor certain actors. Optimistically, even given all that you might be able to build a policy that generates more efficiencies than a whitelist of a couple sectors. Even if you can, though, you won't be able to effectively communicate the why of any particular decision to the public. So they get pissed off when you allow people to go to the beach on a sunny day to pop open a bottle of beer while you disallow in-person religious services.
A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
This is basically my main complaint about the approach in the US. That ship has long sailed, but it should have been straight quarantine. We got soft 'shelter in place' that was basically disregarded based on what I saw ( in IL suburbs at least; can't speak for other places ) and not applied uniformly. And I don't even want to get started on our governor deciding that golfing is somehow essential to the quality of life here. In short, I understand the anger. I even understand the guy, who did not want to wear a mask out of spite at my wife's place ( more specifically, he did not want to wear it, because eff IL state government; he put it on when he was told it was office policy.. ). But it is getting messy and we better figure it out quick, before that powder cake gets lit. The opportunity to contain it has passed and now we really need to think hard what to do next, because options are not great.

gpm 6y ago

This argument would make more sense if tesla wasn't defined as essential by most relevant legal definitions of essential [0] - or at least portions of their business (solar panels) are and those portions were also shut down by the county. [0] Basically all of these include the federal governments list that can be found at the link below. This list explicitly includes the manufacture of solar panels amongst many other things. https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Version_3.0_CISA_Guidance_on_Essential_Critical_Infrastructure_Workers_4.pdf https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Versio... The only one relevant legal definition that doesn't, is Alameda county. But even they say "Businesses may also operate to manufacture distributed energy resource components, like solar panels." https://covid-19.acgov.org/covid19-assets/docs/5-4-20%20Alameda%20County%20SIP%20Order%20FAQ%205.9.20%2011%20AM.pdf https://covid-19.acgov.org/covid19-assets/docs/5-4-20%20Alam...

harryh 6y ago
The factory in Fremont manufactures cars not solar panels or grid batteries.
- gpm 6y ago
  Are you sure? I have the impression (not sure from where) that it was both cars and solar. I'd also point out that the federal list includes the following, so most of my point stands either way > Workers critical to the manufacturing, [...] of vehicles
scarmig 6y ago
The list you provide is 20 pages of bullet points listing jobs that are supposedly essential. I actually have a hard time figuring out a job that wouldn't qualify as essential. Also, at the top of the document: > This list is advisory in nature. It is not, nor should it be considered, a federal directive or standard. Additionally, this advisory list is not intended to be the exclusive list of critical infrastructure sectors, workers, and functions that should continue during the COVID-19 response across all jurisdictions. Individual jurisdictions should add or subtract essential workforce categories based on their own requirements and discretion.

jameshart 6y ago

Just to clarify something that seems to be a point of confusion in the current reporting environment, since you mentioned Tyson and meatpacking in there...: Meat packing plants are essential businesses. They should be operating. State and local lockdown ordnances are not preventing them from doing so. The issue about meat packing plants being closed is not that they are being forced to shut by overzealous Democratic governors. They are being shut by their owners, insurers, and occasionally government actors, when - while trying to operate as an essential business - an outbreak of Covid starts to affect their workforce and makes continuing to operate too much of a public health and private liability risk. Everybody wants meatpacking plants to be open if it's possible to do so. The workers, the owners, the government, and people who like eating meat. But if it can't be done without exposing large numbers of meatpacking and meat supply chain workers to the risk of Sars-Cov-2 infection, then in spite of how essential they are particular plants are going to have to close. Now it is possible that Tesla will be able to open up and operate and not become a Covid hotspot. But there's definitely a risk that they will, just like the meatpacking plants did. And is that risk worth taking for luxury cars, rather than food?

Waterluvian 6y ago
Not that this affects what you're saying and it doesn't necessarily make for a practical srgument, but it sprang to mind. Do car parts in the supply chain go bad? What about livestock? Like can you literally just keep cattle and pigs and chicken alive longer if demand drops short term?
- twblalock 6y ago
  Given the number of farms getting ready to kill their unsold livestock, the answer is no, you can't just keep them around. It costs money to keep livestock fed and healthy, and if they can't be sold then farmers lose money every day. Eventually the farmers need to prevent further losses by killing the animals.
- bentpins 6y ago
  https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/25/us/chickens-depopulated-delmarva-plants-delaware-maryland/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/25/us/chickens-depopulated-d... It's not really doable from what I've been seeing. The animals grow to big and living conditions worsen

twblalock 6y ago

> Right now, the government has a simple story: essential businesses stay open, and everything else stays closed. It's quick to express and easily understandable. That ship sailed a while ago. Home Depot is open and packed to the gills (literally people lining up to get in the front door at my neighborhood Home Depot which is about 20 minutes from the Tesla factory). Most of the people shopping there aren't doing anything essential -- their home improvement projects and gardens can wait. Similarly, marijuana dispensaries are still open in California. They aren't really essential: unlike in the case of alcohol, withdrawal from marijuana is not dangerous and smokers could go without it. Yet dispensaries are "essential". On the other hand, car parades and just "going for a drive" are officially discouraged even though there is no chance of contact with strangers when you are inside your car. At this point, to say that those businesses are essential, and yet a car factory is not, is plainly ridiculous. What kind of rational decision-making process results in marijuana dispensaries being more essential than car factories? The government can't get out of this by claiming it can't pick and choose, because it has already been picking and choosing for a while. It has given the green light to more questionable cases than the Tesla factory.

read_if_gay_ 6y ago
I think marijuana dispensaries are a weak example. There probably is a fair number of people who actually need their medical marijuana.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
camel_gopher 6y ago
They are essential because people stay home and some up.
watwut 6y ago
> Home Depot is open and packed to the gills (literally people lining up to get in the front door at my neighborhood Home Depot which is about 20 minutes from the Tesla factory). Most of the people shopping there aren't doing anything essential -- their home improvement projects and gardens can wait Shops where I live mandate masks and either gloves or hand sanitizer. Also, people have to wait two meters from each other and only limited amount of people can be in at the same time. It seemed reasonable to me to allow shops like Home Depot if the above restrictions are hold. You are more likely to get Covid by prolonged contact then by brief one. And if they expect people to stay at home, it makes sense to allow them to do something with that time so they dont go crazy. Gardening and home restriction are reasonable, smart activities for lockdown.

concordDance 6y ago

I feel "the government" in the above post is conflating the local government and the state and federal governments in a very unhelpful way.