4 ms·

>The horrifying precedent is small numbers of people who do not always stand for election making highly consequential decisions for large numbers of people. No

>The horrifying precedent is small numbers of people who do not always stand for election making highly consequential decisions for large numbers of people. Nothing new there, beaurocrats and public health officials have long had the power to make highly consequential decisions for large numbers of people. Yes we could do with some debate about the power they exercise and about how to handle the next pandemic, and there will be a next pandemic. However your dramatic tone is unwarranted and unhelpful.

smitty1e 5y ago
> Nothing new there, beaurocrats and public health officials have long had the power to make highly consequential decisions for large numbers of people. I'll yield on the kind, but the degree with the Covid is off the charts for peacetime action. Was this wise? Were the across-the-board outcomes worth it? Those who made the decisions may be biased in their reflections on the matter.
- biorach 5y ago
  > but the degree with the Covid is off the charts for peacetime action. Actually, no. This is exactly the level of heavy handed, indiscriminate beaurocratic/government control that poorer people have always had to deal with - see for example how large scale city planning has tended to distribute its most disruptive consequences among the poorest neighbourhoods, or how public health systems have judged most harshly and intruded most forcefully into the lives of the poorest. So again, nothing new. The only new thing is that middle class and wealthy people - such as you and I - suddenly experience this and react in shock. > Were the across-the-board outcomes worth it? Lives saved, lives disrupted, jobs lost... I don't know.It's a complex calculus, requiring a dispassionate and objective inquiry, which you clearly are not in a position to make > Those who made the decisions may be biased in their reflections on the matter Whatever
  - smitty1e 5y ago
    > Actually, no. This is exactly the level of heavy handed, indiscriminate beaurocratic/government control that poorer people have always had to deal with - see for example how large scale city planning has tended to distribute its most disruptive consequences among the poorest neighbourhoods, or how public health systems have judged most harshly and intruded most forcefully into the lives of the poorest. Once again: kind, not degree. Short of wartime mobilization, there just aren't examples of bureaucrats ordering wrenching economic changes on this scale.

smitty1e 5y ago

> Nothing new there, beaurocrats and public health officials have long had the power to make highly consequential decisions for large numbers of people. I'll yield on the kind, but the degree with the Covid is off the charts for peacetime action. Was this wise? Were the across-the-board outcomes worth it? Those who made the decisions may be biased in their reflections on the matter.

biorach 5y ago
> but the degree with the Covid is off the charts for peacetime action. Actually, no. This is exactly the level of heavy handed, indiscriminate beaurocratic/government control that poorer people have always had to deal with - see for example how large scale city planning has tended to distribute its most disruptive consequences among the poorest neighbourhoods, or how public health systems have judged most harshly and intruded most forcefully into the lives of the poorest. So again, nothing new. The only new thing is that middle class and wealthy people - such as you and I - suddenly experience this and react in shock. > Were the across-the-board outcomes worth it? Lives saved, lives disrupted, jobs lost... I don't know.It's a complex calculus, requiring a dispassionate and objective inquiry, which you clearly are not in a position to make > Those who made the decisions may be biased in their reflections on the matter Whatever
- smitty1e 5y ago
  > Actually, no. This is exactly the level of heavy handed, indiscriminate beaurocratic/government control that poorer people have always had to deal with - see for example how large scale city planning has tended to distribute its most disruptive consequences among the poorest neighbourhoods, or how public health systems have judged most harshly and intruded most forcefully into the lives of the poorest. Once again: kind, not degree. Short of wartime mobilization, there just aren't examples of bureaucrats ordering wrenching economic changes on this scale.