BF2S Forums Pandemic thread

Blocking a hospital entry doesn't seem like a very good way to endear yourselves to everyone else. A far cry from Hong Kongers parting like the Red Sea to let ambulances and fire trucks through.

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

uziq wrote:

people with confederate flags have blocked roads in lansing, MI, protesting the 'stay at home' order and blocking ambulances from getting to a hospital.

lmao. freeeeeEEEeeeeedom

Read an article about that. Mostly I saw cars with US flags on them.

Seems to me like a political rally and its inherent behaviors at this time just puts everything at risk.

A guy with a hitched boat made a point to complain that he was being told not to "go fishing with his kids," as if it really needs to be explained why. "I'm not coming into contact with anyone out on a boat!" as if he's not stopping to get gas and supplies for a non-essential activity, exposing his family and everyone he comes in contact with to additional vectors. It's a selfish perspective. The state doesn't have the resources to determine if that's really what you're doing, and to be honest it shouldn't have to be their business to. It's easier to understand someone who's living at the financial brink of not being able to afford food or shelter, let alone medicine. This guy doesn't need to go fishing with his kids in his fancy boat. He just feels cooped up. He should deal with it like an adult and stay home anyway.

Why should he have to? Why has my governor banned all boats from being launched until May? Why are all golf courses closed? Could it be because they're trying to stick it to the wealthy? Could it be class warfare? Seems petty to me.

The difficult part would be to limit movement of people. Imagine state X and Y. X has a lot of cases, Y has very few. X decides to close down but Y remains open. Around lockdown and even after lockdown, the likelihood of people moving from X to Y is pretty much 100%. With a disease that is infectious even if people are asymptomatic, that poses considerable risk.

Second is the fact that the spread started with few cases everywhere. At the end of the day in a progressing epidemic/pandemic you're always left chasing events. With this virus the first confirmed cases are only indicators that the disease is already moving. Its long incubation period and the majority of infected not having serious symptoms means it's almost impossible to gain control over the spread. Locking down everything for X number of weeks ensures government can localise and neutralise the spread with near certainty. The key is: the longer the better.

Now the absolutely crucial time will come when everything is about to re-open. Government and society at large need to cooperate to ensure it doesn't immediately resurface. Movement of people needs to be limited. Social distance between people needs to be maintained for the next year or so. Restaurants, cinemas, theaters, gyms can only reopen under strict sanitation & social distancing guidelines. Bars and events may only continue if all the above has been implemented without a returning wave of sick people. It may also become mandatory to wear face masks in public. We may consider apps informing users of contact with confirmed corona cases like in south korea, which can greatly help control the spread.

It is unlikely that everyone will abide by these guidelines and rules, but almost everyone needs to. Legal and social pressures have to make sure of that. This poses an issue for societies like ours which value individualism over collective consideration. The crowds protesting against lockdowns for example must be engaged aggressively politically, scientifically and socially. Hell at some point down the line, though only if they become too large and vocal, you'd have to consider deploying some form of state power to deny them a platform and further following.

Whatever the case, public and politics absolutely have to ignore screaming business gurus or those who 'want their freedom back!'. The implementation and removal of restrictions has to be done perfectly erring on the safe side. Whatever economic damage is done, the economic and human cost will be incomparable if lockdown reversal is not done right and rushed. There is no do-over. A second lockdown would surely 'break the economy'.

I mean, idiots are calling the cops on their neighbors if they take too many walks around the block. My town supervisor is taking this as an opportunity to clamp down on leaf blowers because he says that they can potentially spread the virus. It's gotten completely stupid.

Larssen wrote:

Jay wrote:

I mean, idiots are calling the cops on their neighbors if they take too many walks around the block. My town supervisor is taking this as an opportunity to clamp down on leaf blowers because he says that they can potentially spread the virus. It's gotten completely stupid.

Err on the safe side. It may feel stupid and I consider that somewhat counterproductive, but don't let the aversion for restrictions affect their effective implementation.

That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

The more you restrict people, and the more arbitrary the restrictions become, the less people will take it seriously. It's just how life works. When you create a million rules, people tune out.

Larssen wrote:

I did write I consider it counterproductive. But if the public debate or your focus is shifted from why restrictions are necessary to how much you dislike them, you'll be fucked before you know it.

No, it will just lead to a backlash like the Michigan rally. The more they try to clamp down, and the less they can justify the restrictions rationally, the more anger they're going to produce. I'm honestly surprised there haven't already been riots. Millions of people are out of work right now.

Larssen wrote:

Well no the people in Michigan don't strike me as the types that are rationally expressing their dislike for these restrictions.

You like reducing things to individuals and their choices right: part of the reason why south korea, singapore and China got such a sudden strong hold on the virus is because culturally they value consideration and prioritising the public good. On an individual level too. The people in Michigan could learn from that.

No, they have autocratic governments and are populated by people that are reflexively obedient to government. Americans are more likely to tell the government to fuck off than to comply... which is why roughly 60 pages ago I said restrictions were pointless in the US...

Didn't I just also write that there is no do over?

You want to flood your healthcare system with 1 million + dead within a year? After all is said and done you'll barely have doctors and nurses left standing. In most normal societies healthcare is considered one of the basics of a country's or city's infrastructure, good luck running the show without it.

Culture matters. The inherent distrust for government in the US and the strain of libertarianism and anti-big government you follow are absolutely uniquely American and have historical roots going back to your war for independence. Similarly there are long-standing cultural attitudes in asian societies not necessarily related to the idea that they're all just repressed. South Korea isn't exactly a dictatorship, you must've confused it with the North. Their tolerance and rationalisation of their 'obedience' is simply better suited to these types of situations. The dominant attitude is directly opposite to your own: even if the situation may be unreasonable or not easily explained, people there will still be convinced that it is better to work together and follow given structures, whereas you reflexively oppose them. Now who would be better equipped to fight an enemy that demands all people in a society work together?

Last edited by Larssen (2020-04-16 13:52:58)

Well the problem you're facing is a non-human virus that will spread and mutate if you cannot collectively agree on social rules and restrictions. The economic and human cost of it running wild is astronomical compared to what will happen in a limited lockdown. Your choice is not just your choice. It immediately affects others.

I like the little line on war. There hasn't been organised violence on US soil in almost 200 years. All you've done is band together to inflict suffering on others, preferably far away, the violence being of no consequence to your own people (apart from dead soldiers). Communities are really tested if they are subject to a repressive reality outside of their control or without a quick fix. That in mind the tolerance and community spirit in the US is probably quite awful.

Last edited by Larssen (2020-04-16 14:11:37)

Larssen wrote:

Well the problem you're facing is a non-human virus that will spread and mutate if you cannot collectively agree on social rules and restrictions. The economic and human cost of it running wild is astronomical compared to what will happen in a limited lockdown. Your choice is not just your choice. It immediately affects others.

I like the little line on war. There hasn't been organised violence on US soil in almost 200 years. All you've done is band together to inflict suffering on others, preferably far away, the violence being of no consequence to your own people (apart from dead soldiers). Communities are really tested if they are subject to a repressive reality outside of their control or without a quick fix. That in mind the tolerance and community spirit in the US is probably quite awful.

It's going to mutate before we ever have a vaccine. What's the point of all this? Are we going to keep going into lockdown every 6 months? This is as pointless as the TSA.

I'm aware of what the political costs are. The reality is that this is political theater right now, all this lockdown stuff. In the long run we will all get it, and many will die. By pretending that they are in control of something that is uncontrollable, they will, in the end, reinforce the idea that government is ineffective and that our political leaders can't snap their fingers and make things happen like they think they can. The only people that are in favor of the quarantines right now are the people who think government is and should be omnipotent and should have the power to do whatever it wants for the common good. American liberals are the "do something, anything" types that demand government action whenever they run into something they dislike. American conservatives are the ones giving them a million reasons why their attempts to control the uncontrollable will fail. The conservatives are usually right.

Last edited by Jay (2020-04-16 14:40:07)

DesertFox- wrote:

I swear that boiling down American ideals as "freedom" to oversimplify it for the lowest common denominator has been a huge mistake. It's been used to justify the most harmful behaviors to the society, and ironically, the nation itself because some jackass decides it means Thomas Jefferson wanted him to go golfing during a pandemic.

What is wrong with golfing?