Friday, April 17, 2020

False equivalence

There’s something going around Facebook that goes something like this.

“The curve is flattening; we can start lifting the restrictions now.

=

“The parachute is slowed our rate of descent; I can take it off now.


I’m surprised that I see really intelligent people posting this foolishness.

The balancing of further damaging the economy and managing the virus, is multifaceted and not a static situation.

The job of a parachute is to safely get one from point a to point b in relative safety.   To remove the parachute before it’s done it’s job is foolish.

To begin to plan for the loosening of restrictions and getting people back to work, is prudent.

To ignore the fact that the restrictions cause harm, which must be balanced against the harm of the virus, is foolish.   Just like making or supporting decisions based on dislike for Trump is foolish.

Speaking of foolish, Joe Biden

We’re in the middle of a global pandemic. No one feeling ill should have to choose between earning a paycheck or staying home to recover. We need to provide paid sick leave to everyone who needs it immediately.”

I hate to break it to him, but giving people money for “paid sick leave” is not “earning a paycheck”.   Forcing people to stop “earning a paycheck” has nothing to do with choice.   

How about letting people choose to go back to work in a responsible way, taking into account the local conditions, instead of forcing them to take paid “sick leave” when they aren’t sick.

4 comments:

Marshal Art said...

The more I read, the more it seems certain the present list of restrictions was unnecessary. One study showed no significant difference in the infection/death rates between nations with the strictest restrictions and those with the least...like Sweden. Even the "flattening the curve" intention resulted in few, if any, hospitals coming close to the volume of cases predicted.

Restrictions were imposed rather abruptly, even conceding the unknowns regarding the potential dangers. But with the available data, we're not getting a comparable lifting of those restrictions. I see no logic to doing it slowly given that data, nor do I see any problems in the market getting things back to normal. Except for those unfortunately destroyed by this unnecessary interruption, this is no more than a very long weekend and businesses will get their own acts together just fine.

There are those who have bought into the hype surrounding this virus...admittedly some due to personally knowing victims of it...and their nasty attitudes toward those who haven't results in stupid memes such as that which you've highlighted.

Craig said...

I think that initially the restrictions served to shock people into taking things seriously, and to provide a break point. At this point, now that we know the models were horribly bad and that the death numbers are being artificially inflated, it seems reasonable that it’s time to start a phased in process to allow the lower risk parts of the population to start getting the economy headed back in the right direction, while continuing to protect the higher risk people.

Marshal Art said...

But why a "phased in" approach, as if government could possibly do things better than those in the private sector with the most to lose? I don't get government "phasing in" our rights after abruptly restricting them.

Craig said...

I think that you phase it in to protect the most vulnerable groups, while allowing others to get back to normal. I also think that would include distancing and PPE continued for a while. As well as the realization that places like NYC, might be at higher risk because of population density than other places. Maybe they’ll have to move slower than other areas.

Even as we realize the abject failures of the models, it still seems that cautious reopening is the better option.

I’m seeing a fair number of people I know who would prefer not to lose their businesses starting to talk about a rebellion of sorts. We need a policy that isn’t going to ruin people, that allows them to stay in business, yet doesn’t simply make them dependent on the govt.

I’m finding the people (celebs, teachers, govt employees, etc) who are getting paid, or are quarantined in luxury, and have no real fear of not going back to work who lecture small business owners annoying. The blithe assumptions that all business owners are rich and that they aren’t at risk of losing years of effort because of this is a bad look.