4 ms·
"If you truly believe that that trade-off is worth it, " ??? Whuan/Australia clamped down and then they were relatively COVID free and their economies are exp
by jariel 6y ago
"If you truly believe that that trade-off is worth it, "
???
Whuan/Australia clamped down and then they were relatively COVID free and their economies are expanding. The US is still in upside down mode with business flailing people dying.
.5% death rate is meaningless if 1) it expands rapidly enough to overwhelm the health system 2) even at that rate we're talking millions of dead Americans and therefore must be dealt with.
I'd 100% have rather taken the path of Wuhan, Australia or Taiwan who have effectively dealt with this issue while the rest of us flail in the wind.
- salmon30salmon 6y agoThis is exactly my problem. The United States is structurally terrible at responding to a pandemic. We have a slow moving, federal republic with (ostensibly) a weak executive. We have open borders between states that is (arguably) constitutionally protected. We have a patchwork of local authorities with differing skills and abilities. The federal republic is an incredible system of government for many things. The balance that it has (in theory) restricts it from doing anything quickly, including responding to a pandemic. Yes, the pandemic caught us with our pants down, so to speak. But I would not trade for authoritarian control for protection against a once-in-a-century pandemic. (I know Aus is not an authoritarian country and is quite like the US culturally. But it is an island. The only non-island nations that have curtailed this are strong authoritarian states)
- Brian_K_White 6y agoThe same structure has responded to nationwide events with more competency in the past. It's only the structure in that the structure allows for such incompetence to inhabit key offices.