I would submit, though, that the most effective way to really start getting a jump on restarting the country is to make sure we have several things, the first being ways to seriously check the spread. This means more than just trusting people to police themselves. Wearing masks have to be mandatory, and authorities should have the ability to fine shops that don’t enforce that rule. It also means setting up thermometer cameras in airports and other places of mass transit infrastructure.
Beyond that, though, the healthcare system needs two things it does not now really have: one is good, reliable testing on a massive scale. Without that, we’re very likely going to be right back where we are now. Keep in mind that not all countries are requiring lock downs. One major reason we are is due to the fact that we lack the testing and therefore don’t have the ability to immediately separate the infected from those who have yet to be infected. Most of the country, most of the world still does not yet have COVID-19, and yet nobody other than those who are infected have immunity. So what do you think the result is going to be once we pretend that we’ve flattened the curve??? It’s pretty predictable , really.
The other thing we need - and we’ve needed for decades - is a health system that encourages people to visit their healthcare provider before they are in urgent, life-threatening situations. South Korea, Germany, and a few other countries have, to some degree, been good at getting people into treatment before they become acutely ill. Here, however, people are either uninsured or under-insured. This is also another reason why people aren’t getting tested. It’s not just the lack of good tests; it’s the assumption that they will have to shell out a lot of money when money is hard to come by.
It’s almost as though some people are actually siding with Texas’ Lt. Governor and trying to convince us that life is hard, suck it up, take one for the team, and be willing to take the dirt nap for the ‘job creators.’ I just don’t accept this. We’re the richest country on earth, and the average person has a right to expect better outcomes for the average person.
They almost certainly will, but worst of all, they’re going to wear down the health care workers. There’s not an infinite supply of doctors and nurses. Heart attacks and cancer aren’t going to wait for COVID-19 to pass through.
Even worse than that, people are going to start losing confidence in government’s ability to manage the crisis. I’m not suggesting that people trust government implicitly, but we do trust that we live in a developed country that can somehow find ways to respond to crises. Chipping away at that confidence undermines trust in ways we can’t foresee, but I don’t see anything good coming out of it.
From your cite …
"Democrats were also quick to note that Abbott’s task force does not include any local officials, whom Abbott had initially deferred to in enacting policies to contain the coronavirus. One of those officials, Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins, responded to Abbott’s news conference with a statement urging local, state and federal officials to work together to restore the economy in a responsible way.
"
If he deferred to them, why didn’t they do what was necessary?
I think most of you are talking to someone else. I have in no way shape or form suggested that opening back up entailed NO safety protocols. As to guessing what people will do given a “you do this but follow these protocols” order I seriously wonder how you can:
Have so MUCH faith in government (as and by the people)
Have so LITTLE faith in the general public to be safe for not only themselves but the people around them.
That’s the genius about the safety protocols, if I follow them, then as long as the people around me aren’t hugging and kissing me, I should be ok!
If people aren’t following them, then, like NOW, they can be fined.
While I support the measures taken here in Illinois – lockdown recently extended through May 31 – I wonder if leaders aren’t missing an opportunity to act responsibly and cheerlead at the same time.
I have read about the need for two continuous weeks of declining cases in an area before restrictions can be lifted. Since case numbers (however inaccurate) are published almost daily in our paper, it seems like that’s a readily available metric everyone can understand. A governor or mayor could say, Look, we need to stay locked down as tightly as possible to get these numbers in decline. I want to open up as badly as you do, so let’s all follow these restrictions until we get these numbers down!
Then the “opening up” stages need to be explicit and very gradual, with every stage requiring another two weeks of declining cases.
He is actually ignoring what the mayors in the big cities are saying, so before going forward you need to be aware that what you think is “necessary” has been criticized in many ways.
Yes, he is. He didn’t ignore them originally though and they had their shot. That is how I took the quoted piece. He deferred to them originally in containing this virus, when that failed, he took action.
Is should NOW be of no surprise to any of them that he isn’t asking them for their opinions.
Its interesting you mention California. My wife talked to her friend from SF area and she said restrictions are way tighter out there than here in Kansas City. For example they arent allowing lawn service companies to operate. She said many in her area are getting frustrated with restrictions.
It just isnt going to happen. Way to many people are without income and their jobs are going away. Many more businesses are closing than we know about.
So back to the OP, reps want to end restrictions to allow the economy to recover. It doesnt mean they are opening things wide open.
Maybe the question should be why do democrats want to restrict ways for people to safely go back to work?
Theoretically they are not allowed, but my guy comes regularly - just one person, no danger of anything - and so do others. Haven’t seen the police complaining.
We are frustrated, of course, but we are damn glad for the restrictions since we have flattened the curve enough to lend ventilators to states who need them more than we do. I’m in a Writers’ Club with people of all sorts of religious and political views, and no one wants to be unsafe.
So, who decides what is safe? Scientifically ignorant Republicans such as Kemp: asymptomatic people spread the virus? Who knew? and Trump: inject bleach. Unproven remedies are great to try. We’ll open by Easter.
How about Democrats and intelligent Republicans who listen to the health experts?
Doesn’t really matter anyway, since lots of business owners are smarter than the governors, and are sure as hell not opening when it puts their workers and customers at risk. Remember, the restaurant business crashed before the restrictions went into effect.
Trolls and bots are flooding social media with disinformation encouraging states to end quarantine…An analysis from Bot Sentinel, a bot tracking platform, found that bots and trolls have been stoking sentiments online that have fueled the protests, using hashtags like #ReopenAmericaNow and #StopTheMadness…“Inauthentic accounts are amplifying disinformation and inaccurate statistics and sharing false information as a reason to reopen the country,” Bouzy says. “Many of these accounts are also spreading bizarre conspiracy theories about Democrats using COVID-19 as a way to take away American freedoms and prevent Americans from voting.”
Piffle, that only showed that he deferred to them, where is the cite that what they did then was bad? Remember that the issue is now to end the restrictions. Lets see your cite where it shows that the mayors are wrong and the governor is correct.
I’m very cautious about opening up, but there are definitely things that can be done on the margin. There are plenty of businesses that could resume operation in very low-risk ways.
Our gardener continued to work during the lockdown. He works alone, outside the house, and we can communicate at a distance or via cell phone. There’s really extremely small risk there.
I’m less sanguine about barbershops and restaurants. Unless you literally have a private room where one family group meets, it’s a fairly big risk. Have people seen this diagram of spread in a restaurant? Those people at other tables are way more than 6 feet away.
The economics of restaurants are such that any place enforcing social distancing is almost guaranteed to lose money, since they’d have to keep people out during busy times.
And much as I need a haircut, unless Edward Scissorhands is around I’m not getting that close to my barber.
Isn’t that kind of the opposite of “quite a few”, especially when 75% support shelter-in-place “as long as needed”? I mean, 75% support for anything is overwhelming. It means even vast numbers of California Republicans support it.