We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Wednesday, April 29. 2020
It was similar to this virus
Why is the reaction so different?
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
My guess is the difference is based on 3 things.
First politics. I still haven't figured out the angle here outside of "never let a crisis go to waste". The Left/Right differences about the shutdown itself are almost non-existent outside of extremes of "stay isolated" and "open immediately". Both are foolish points of view, but seem to be the main measure of political differentiation. Deeper down is a political difference based on economic illiteracy or literacy. What drives production and value?
The Left thinks it's government. The Right has a better grasp on the issue of productivity and value...that sitting at home and having printed money arrive each week is not productive or beneficial to anyone.
The second difference is memory. As I said to Mrs. Bulldog, people in the age of the vaccine (post 1960) have come to believe we are not only 'safe' from most diseases, but we need to take 'any step necessary' to be 'safe'. It's a strange viewpoint, but nobody remembers (and being born in 1962, I don't...though I understand history) that we just went about our business and we tried to protect people as best we could.
Which brings us to the third difference. Fear. We really do live in an age of fear. That is, fear of loss. Loss of anything. Money, a loved one, our homes, our livelihoods (a point which goes back up to the first difference), and our general health. Triggering fear is much easier with the 24/7 news cycle and social media. Doesn't take much to freak people out. We're only 82 years removed from Orson Welles' "War of the Worlds", but we may as well be 2,000 because the impact of all the available news sources is so much greater.
I'm not sure this is a difference, because this part was probably true back in 1968. But we confuse information with "science" and "certainty". Many people refuse to use common sense. "They say" is far more common today because "they" are everywhere. And "they" are all authorities.
I don't make a claim on authority. I will make a claim on using my head and use of common sense. That's pretty much all you need to survive and thrive, most of the time. A little knowledge and understanding, rather than just acceptance of information, can go a long way. Sadly, it's not how information is dealt with any more.
Modeling isn't science. It's a guess. It has assumptions and parameters and you can make models do all kinds of things depending on how you manage them. Like tell people 2 million US citizens will die....and scare them into submission.
I doubt we'll hit 120,000. I could be wrong, and if I am, I will accept I underestimated the danger (assuming I survive...). But 120,000 would be a pretty bad scenario when the low scenario from the Imperial College of 60,000 is probably going to be the ultimate number.
Modern Monetary Theory had not been invented in 1968. For the left, the Coronavirus pandemic is just a trial run for the upcoming Environmental Emergency that will require massive restructuring of the economy and equally massive money printing. Hold on to your wallet.
I didn't mention MMT. But it did exist in a form. Chartalism isn't MMT, but it's not a distant cousin, and that's been around a long time.
Both are based on flawed financial concepts. But hey - to each his own.
Sorry, I was not sufficiently clear in my response. The reaction is different because MMT did not exist at the time of the Hong Kong flu, so there was no incentive for governing elites to create a crisis at that time.
By contrast, political leaders (especially of blue states) have every incentive to blow this "crisis" grossly out of proportion to provide the justification for printing massive amounts of money which can be used to subsidize their Blue State budget woes.
This may have started as a health crisis, but it has devolved into nothing more than the biggest raid on the US Treasury in history. It's not an accident that that the governors of NY, NJ, CA, and IL are leading the way. Just look at their pensions.
Bulldog the US is already past your ultimate number.
Yes, I know. I posted that without checking the numbers for the day.
In reality, the number is essentially going to be fluid. We don't know (since it's becoming clear hospitals make more by listing Covid patients by a factor of 3) how many administrators are overstating.
We also don't know comorbidity rates and other factors which wouldn't necessarily lower Covid mortality rates, but would at least provide a window on how it could have been dealt with more effectively.
120,000 may ultimately be the figure. It may be 150,000. or higher. As I said, I'm not an authority - and the number of deaths is secondary to the discussion (unless, of course, you know someone - or are someone - who died) of whether we should open up or even how we open up.
We were told to lock down because the number was 2mm. If we even get there...
Completely different country in 1968. Things were more dangerous. There were no snowflakes or helicopter parents and the expectations for medical care were much less. BTW 100,000 deaths then is equivalent to 150,000 now. A number that still cannot be completely ruled out by the time COVID-19 is done.
Good analysis, Bulldog. My take is the change is due to 1. Liberal school indoctrination for the last fifty years, 2. Liberal media, 3. Liberal Television, and 4. The Internet (especially, social media).
For perspective I did some rough back of the envelope calculations based on CDC provided numbers, and some rough population figures. Quotes are from the CDC.
It was first noted in the United States in September 1968. The estimated number of deaths was 1 million worldwide and about 100,000 in the United States. Most excess deaths were in people 65 years and older.
US population then was approximately 200 million. An equivalent figure with our current population of 328 million (give or take) would be roughly 164,000 fatalities.
It was first reported in Singapore in February 1957, Hong Kong in April 1957, and in coastal cities in the United States in summer 1957. The estimated number of deaths was 1.1 million worldwide and 116,000 in the United States.
US population then was about 172 million, giving an equivalent number of deaths today of 221,000.
The big one, 1918-1919, caused an estimated 675,000 fatalities out of a population around 100 million. Equivalent to the 2.2 million estimate from Ferguson back at the start of all this.
We've had a really extraordinary run of good luck since 1970, especially the 2009 H1N1 outbreak happening in the US at just the right time in the influenza cycle. If it had hit mid-winter the way this one did we might have seen the same reaction at an more economically precarious time.
To imply it is politics is naive. Is it politics in every country? Even though a lot of it is playing out in politics here that would be true no matter what the crisis because the Democrats are desperate to elect the brain dead Biden and they will make politics out of anything.
The reason it is a big deal and not the Hong Kong flu is because it is going to do a lot more damage than the Hong Kong flu did. At this exact moment it doesn't look "so bad" because it hasn't finished it's pandemic. The shutdown/quarantine worked. But it will eventually infect 70% give or take 10% and 0.1%-0.3% of those infected will die from it. That is going to be a lot of deaths. And they are discovering that even people who recover have a variety of health issues and some of them are serious.
This has just begun. We got a few weeks of slowing thanks to the shutdown but it's gonna come back and bigger this time.
I admire your ability to be consistently and completely wrong for weeks on end ... and yet you persist without a hint of shame.
There seem to be a lot of trolls now posing on these threads.
Your 'numbers' are pandemic porn.
There's never been a fully tested environment with anywhere near a 70% infection rate.
As I calculated above from the CDC figures, an event equivalent of the 1968 pandemic would cause about 164,000 deaths, or about 3 times as many as we have right now.
Alliteration and it’s accurate. Well played.
"an event equivalent of the 1968 pandemic would cause about 164,000 deaths, or about 3 times as many as we have right now."
This illustrates your incredible naivete. on March 3 we had 6927 dead in the U.S. from covid-19. Today 26 days later we have 61,796. 26 DAYS!!! and you want to compare it with 365 days of some other virus and hope no one notices the apples to oranges comparison. In 26 more days we will have well over 100,000 deaths probably closer to 150,000 and you will then have to compare it with the black plague. You seem unable to see what is going on around you. This pandemic is in it's infancy, it's barely out of the starters gate.
It would be possible for you to make your point, what ever it is, without the blinders on. It would make it easier to acknowledge what is true.
If we rush the lockdown relaxation too much we're going to kill all of the kids saved by the use of electric vehicles.
"Why is the reaction so differnt? "
The virus or the response to it? America has enemies; Trump has more. See the latest on the Flynn case, keeping in mind the comment atributed to Hilary 'If that bastard wins, we're all going to jail!'
Sydney Powell has new info out Friday with another doozey today.
Then remember China faces a worse health issue, an insurection movement in Hong Kong, now crushed, a potential defection of North Korea from its sphere of influence if Kim made a deal with Trump. They were quite happy to close interanl travel from Wuhan province but allow, and probably encouraged, international travel directly and indirectly to Europe and the US.
The internationalist interventionist wing in Europe and the US still wants the US in Ukraine, and in Syria. Trump was impeached over Ukriane as you recall. Refer again to Victoria Nuland and the latest on the FiSA abuse working its way through the courts. Equally the neocons want to remain in Afghanistan, a country whose government's budget exceeds its GDP, as well as Iraq, and is willing to take on Iran as well.
There are a multitude of domestic groups on the left that remain opposed to Trump, as well as a corporate media establishment, all of which were quite willing to inflate and repeat all negative information while downplaying or simply not covering positive news.
The virus, highly contagous but apparently of very low risk to the young, but increasingly risking the older you are, and the more comorbidities you have. The response from state governors is also a significant. For example compare New York vs. Florida. The failures in NY, to include the malfeasnace of the mayor of NYC, contributed significantly to the death toll. De Santis reported tonight that 25,000 New Yorkers were identified and instructed to self isolate; that was after the state's stay at home order was issued. Florida stopped visitation to nursing homes and focussed testing, when available, and treatment to that community. Cuomo sent people back when they were known to have the virus. Michigan is almosts as bad.
There Are Some Mistakes Science Can't Save Us From
To choose the ‘right thing’ from among the possibilities of knowledge is in its broadest sense a religious question involving the sacred and the forbidden. These terms are now embarrassing to utter in public, yet Winston Churchill saw the quality of these ideals as the highest measure of a civilization. Speaking on the brink of total defeat at the hands of a technologically advanced Nazi Germany in 1940, he said:
But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.
Oh this is completely different from that virus - Trump is President now.
A stop just has to put to that.
This whole thing is getting out of hand. https://www.whiteplainsmasonry.com/
Different reaction now we have a feminised society where courage is called for but abandoned in favour of hiding under our beds.
I agree with the first comment. Bulldog, there is no need to self deprecate in this instance, when "experts" are obviously just protecting their asses so they can get more federal funds, and when anyone who is conscious can see that the models are very wrong and based on worst case scenarios that will not come to pass. Note, a worst case scenario is not worst case if it was something you planned for, but I digress. Also, the relationship between politics and fear is symbiotic. As issues become more political, they are increasingly 'governed' by responses to the fear du jour, no matter how ridiculous that fear is. To attribute naivete to giving politics its proper place in the discussion is a comment from the obtuse.
The choice seems clear, ultimately. We either live in a world where we are blown by every wind, wet by every rain, or we accept our existence as human beings for what it is; a decidedly mixed bag but overall a good one, and keep on keeping on, as the saying goes. Living in fear is not living. Living under the boot of idiots, no matter how well-meaning they pretend to be, is not living. Living destitute and fearful in a land where nothing is lacking is not living.
+10 very well stated.
America was not built on fear but on embracing risk. Worked out pretty well, eh?
The biggest problem with this virus is the amount of media. We have many types of media all fighting for the same advertising dollars. They have to go nuts in order to draw viewers/listeners. In 1969 the Hong Kong Flu killed between 100-150,000 people in the U.S. At the time there were only 3 networks plus Public TV. National news was presented once a day for 30 minutes. Now every little station can broadcast globally; news is 24 hours a day; and every Tom, Dick, and Karen can spout their opinion world wide.
We have the same problem with crime and accidents. What do I care if someone was run over in rural Ohio? A store was robbed in Florida; so what? That should be the standard reply to what used to be gossips; now known as news anchors, pundits, editors, bloggers, so called "experts", etc...so what?
It’s different because this is a coronavirus, not influenza; it’s brand new; and it’s bioengineered, not natural.
You know what else is not living? When you are afraid to touch another person. When you have half your face covered with a mask. When you allow people to die alone and abandoned and deny the family a chance to come together to grieve. When you make grandparents afraid to hug a grandchild.
You do not quarantine healthy people. That is house arrest.
I had Hong Kong flu in my senior year (can't remember whether it was the end of 68 or the start of 69). I fell ill at school, and my dad had to pick me up.
I spent two weeks in bed. Sick as a dog, could barely stagger to the bathroom and back. My mother treated me as unclean, and would dog my path with Lysol spray on anything I touched.
It worked. I was the only one that got it. But, it knocked me out for the better part of a month, all total.