[Goose]

Pretty unprecedented.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/07/healt...trump.html

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2029812

[Goose]

Pretty unprecedented.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/07/healt...trump.html

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2029812

[akiddoc]

I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

[akiddoc]

I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

[lex24]

I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

---

[quote="akiddoc" pid='292853' dateline='1602126507']
I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

Nor should they.  And I always love it when they Chinas response is used as an example. Yeah we can easily do the same types of measures China does. Our governments are so similar as are our cultures. Or Singapore. Anyone ready for a caining? Give me a break.Which is why the New England Journal of Medicine should stick to medicine and stay out of politics. They lose credibility when they do something like this.  And in so doing -  they help Trump.

[lex24]

I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

---

[quote="akiddoc" pid='292853' dateline='1602126507']
I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

Nor should they.  And I always love it when they Chinas response is used as an example. Yeah we can easily do the same types of measures China does. Our governments are so similar as are our cultures. Or Singapore. Anyone ready for a caining? Give me a break.Which is why the New England Journal of Medicine should stick to medicine and stay out of politics. They lose credibility when they do something like this.  And in so doing -  they help Trump.

[chrisk]

I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

---

[quote="akiddoc" pid='292853' dateline='1602126507']
I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

Nor should they.  And I always love it when they Chinas response is used as an example. Yeah we can easily do the same types of measures China does. Our governments are so similar as are our cultures. Or Singapore. Anyone ready for a caining? Give me a break.Which is why the New England Journal of Medicine should stick to medicine and stay out of politics. They lose credibility when they do something like this.  And in so doing -  they help Trump.

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right. It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame. Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

[chrisk]

I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

---

[quote="akiddoc" pid='292853' dateline='1602126507']
I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

Nor should they.  And I always love it when they Chinas response is used as an example. Yeah we can easily do the same types of measures China does. Our governments are so similar as are our cultures. Or Singapore. Anyone ready for a caining? Give me a break.Which is why the New England Journal of Medicine should stick to medicine and stay out of politics. They lose credibility when they do something like this.  And in so doing -  they help Trump.

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right. It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame. Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

[lex24]

I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

---

[quote="akiddoc" pid='292853' dateline='1602126507']
I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

Nor should they.  And I always love it when they Chinas response is used as an example. Yeah we can easily do the same types of measures China does. Our governments are so similar as are our cultures. Or Singapore. Anyone ready for a caining? Give me a break.Which is why the New England Journal of Medicine should stick to medicine and stay out of politics. They lose credibility when they do something like this.  And in so doing -  they help Trump.

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right.  It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame.  Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

 
 Who said it was? My response was to the New England Journal of Medicine wading into the political waters. Which they should not have done. As for East Asian countries - I’m just gonna say what I think is obvious the governments and their cultures are just a tad different than ours. And frankly it’s not easy to change that in a heartbeat. Yes, I get it – Trump screwed up a whole hell of a lot.  So stipulated.  But I’m not sure how different it would’ve been with somebody else at the helm.

And I repeat – things like this help Trump. Oh I realize that most of you that read what I am saying howl with derison questioning how stupid I could be. (Calling those that aren’t as enlightened as the folks on this board”stupid” is a favorite pastime of many here) But I’ll respond by simply saying this – how many of you live in a state or an area that is not bright blue? The election in where you are sitting has already been decided. Who ends up in the White House will not be determined by what you think. Sorry I understand that’s hard for you to accept. Because most of us on this board are essentially elitists. We went to elite schools have elite jobs etc. And those who are not don’t particularly like being told by the elite over and over again how stupid and selfish and “undesirable“ they are. Clinton lost the last election (Trump didn’t really win it) because of her unbelievable disdain for every day working people. Telling us that we are failing in comparison to Beijing is not a road to victory.

[lex24]

I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

---

[quote="akiddoc" pid='292853' dateline='1602126507']
I just came here to post that. Stunning. Medical journals just don't do that.

Nor should they.  And I always love it when they Chinas response is used as an example. Yeah we can easily do the same types of measures China does. Our governments are so similar as are our cultures. Or Singapore. Anyone ready for a caining? Give me a break.Which is why the New England Journal of Medicine should stick to medicine and stay out of politics. They lose credibility when they do something like this.  And in so doing -  they help Trump.

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right.  It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame.  Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

 
 Who said it was? My response was to the New England Journal of Medicine wading into the political waters. Which they should not have done. As for East Asian countries - I’m just gonna say what I think is obvious the governments and their cultures are just a tad different than ours. And frankly it’s not easy to change that in a heartbeat. Yes, I get it – Trump screwed up a whole hell of a lot.  So stipulated.  But I’m not sure how different it would’ve been with somebody else at the helm.

And I repeat – things like this help Trump. Oh I realize that most of you that read what I am saying howl with derison questioning how stupid I could be. (Calling those that aren’t as enlightened as the folks on this board”stupid” is a favorite pastime of many here) But I’ll respond by simply saying this – how many of you live in a state or an area that is not bright blue? The election in where you are sitting has already been decided. Who ends up in the White House will not be determined by what you think. Sorry I understand that’s hard for you to accept. Because most of us on this board are essentially elitists. We went to elite schools have elite jobs etc. And those who are not don’t particularly like being told by the elite over and over again how stupid and selfish and “undesirable“ they are. Clinton lost the last election (Trump didn’t really win it) because of her unbelievable disdain for every day working people. Telling us that we are failing in comparison to Beijing is not a road to victory.

[Goose]

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right.  It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame.  Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

Good question. I think the answer is that Americans look at it from the point of view "What maximizes my happiness?". They would rather do things that make them happy or richer even if that increases the spread of the virus and others may die because of it. As long as they aren't the ones who die, they don't care much. Americans have little concept of collective responsibility. If things get bad enough, eventually Americans will take note, but it has to be pretty bad.

Other cultures have a notion of collective responsibility  and/or a government that will enforce that responsibility. In Japan, the Prime Minister has no power to order people to work from home. However, when he asked, they did. Enforcement wasn't needed. Most countries with this sense of responsibility are culturally homogeneous. Those that aren't have very strong central governments with widespread powers (Singapore).

[Goose]

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right.  It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame.  Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

Good question. I think the answer is that Americans look at it from the point of view "What maximizes my happiness?". They would rather do things that make them happy or richer even if that increases the spread of the virus and others may die because of it. As long as they aren't the ones who die, they don't care much. Americans have little concept of collective responsibility. If things get bad enough, eventually Americans will take note, but it has to be pretty bad.

Other cultures have a notion of collective responsibility  and/or a government that will enforce that responsibility. In Japan, the Prime Minister has no power to order people to work from home. However, when he asked, they did. Enforcement wasn't needed. Most countries with this sense of responsibility are culturally homogeneous. Those that aren't have very strong central governments with widespread powers (Singapore).

[lex24]

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right.  It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame.  Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

Good question. I think the answer is that Americans look at it from the point of view "What maximizes my happiness?". They would rather do things that make them happy or richer even if that increases the spread of the virus and others may die because of it. As long as they aren't the ones who die, they don't care much. Americans have little concept of collective responsibility. If things get bad enough, eventually Americans will take note, but it has to be pretty bad.

Other cultures have a notion of collective responsibility  and/or a government that will enforce that responsibility. In Japan, the Prime Minister has no power to order people to work from home. However, when he asked, they did. Enforcement wasn't needed. Most countries with this sense of responsibility are culturally homogeneous. Those that aren't have very strong central governments with widespread powers (Singapore).

  I disagree with you.  Americans have a strong sense of “collective responsibility”. According to The a World Giving Index,  Americans are the most generous people on the planet. It’s a United Kingdom organization and maybe it’s full of garbage I don’t know. But I have read similar studies that suggest the same thing.

 And Americans always rally to a cause -  such as a natural disaster. With h.u.g.e sums of money and sweat equity being donated.

This is different for a couple reasons. One, you can’t see it. It’s not like a hurricane or tornado that destroys a city or town. Two it has an economic component that no matter how much one wants to deny it, exists. I’m sorry, but I’ll say it again, I think it’s very easy for most of the people on this board to criticize those who are in a “hurry“ to get things open and working again. Because I think most of the people on this board are older, and economically set. Thus they (we) can handle it. It’s a tad different when you’re living paycheck to paycheck and you lose a job, you’re 35 years old, the risk to you is not all that high and you have mouths to feed. 

So again – I’m not willing to throw the American people under the bus or cower in shame because we’re not acting like the Chinese, Singapore or the ***** Germans. And I’m not gonna apologize one iota for that.

[lex24]

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right.  It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame.  Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

Good question. I think the answer is that Americans look at it from the point of view "What maximizes my happiness?". They would rather do things that make them happy or richer even if that increases the spread of the virus and others may die because of it. As long as they aren't the ones who die, they don't care much. Americans have little concept of collective responsibility. If things get bad enough, eventually Americans will take note, but it has to be pretty bad.

Other cultures have a notion of collective responsibility  and/or a government that will enforce that responsibility. In Japan, the Prime Minister has no power to order people to work from home. However, when he asked, they did. Enforcement wasn't needed. Most countries with this sense of responsibility are culturally homogeneous. Those that aren't have very strong central governments with widespread powers (Singapore).

  I disagree with you.  Americans have a strong sense of “collective responsibility”. According to The a World Giving Index,  Americans are the most generous people on the planet. It’s a United Kingdom organization and maybe it’s full of garbage I don’t know. But I have read similar studies that suggest the same thing.

 And Americans always rally to a cause -  such as a natural disaster. With h.u.g.e sums of money and sweat equity being donated.

This is different for a couple reasons. One, you can’t see it. It’s not like a hurricane or tornado that destroys a city or town. Two it has an economic component that no matter how much one wants to deny it, exists. I’m sorry, but I’ll say it again, I think it’s very easy for most of the people on this board to criticize those who are in a “hurry“ to get things open and working again. Because I think most of the people on this board are older, and economically set. Thus they (we) can handle it. It’s a tad different when you’re living paycheck to paycheck and you lose a job, you’re 35 years old, the risk to you is not all that high and you have mouths to feed. 

So again – I’m not willing to throw the American people under the bus or cower in shame because we’re not acting like the Chinese, Singapore or the ***** Germans. And I’m not gonna apologize one iota for that.

[akiddoc]

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right.  It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame.  Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

Good question. I think the answer is that Americans look at it from the point of view "What maximizes my happiness?". They would rather do things that make them happy or richer even if that increases the spread of the virus and others may die because of it. As long as they aren't the ones who die, they don't care much. Americans have little concept of collective responsibility. If things get bad enough, eventually Americans will take note, but it has to be pretty bad.

Other cultures have a notion of collective responsibility  and/or a government that will enforce that responsibility. In Japan, the Prime Minister has no power to order people to work from home. However, when he asked, they did. Enforcement wasn't needed. Most countries with this sense of responsibility are culturally homogeneous. Those that aren't have very strong central governments with widespread powers (Singapore).

  I disagree with you.  Americans have a strong sense of “collective responsibility”. According to The a World Giving Index,  Americans are the most generous people on the planet. It’s a United Kingdom organization and maybe it’s full of garbage I don’t know. But I have read similar studies that suggest the same thing.

 And Americans always rally to a cause -  such as a natural disaster. With h.u.g.e sums of money and sweat equity being donated.

This is different for a couple reasons. One, you can’t see it. It’s not like a hurricane or tornado that destroys a city or town. Two it has an economic component that no matter how much one wants to deny it, exists.  I’m sorry, but I’ll say it again, I think it’s very easy for most of the people on this board to criticize those who are in a “hurry“ to get things open and working again. Because I think most of the people on this board are older, and economically set.  Thus they (we) can handle it. It’s a tad different when you’re living paycheck to paycheck and you lose a job, you’re 35 years old, the risk to you is not all that high and you have mouths to feed. 

So again – I’m not willing to throw the American people under the bus or cower in shame because we’re not acting like the Chinese, Singapore or the ***** Germans. And I’m not gonna apologize one iota for that.

Americans are willing to throw money at things they perceive as a problem. Many are not willing to inconvenience themselves for it. I'm not talking about staying home from work. I'm talking about wearing a mask, not holding social gatherings, not eating at indoor restaurants, not going to bars. On my two block street, everyone appears to be doing the right thing except for one family. They have had at least two massive parties over the past three months, with at least 100 people packed into their yard and walking into their home without masks and without social distancing. This is the narcissistic behavior that is keeping this thing going at a high level.

[akiddoc]

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right.  It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame.  Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

Good question. I think the answer is that Americans look at it from the point of view "What maximizes my happiness?". They would rather do things that make them happy or richer even if that increases the spread of the virus and others may die because of it. As long as they aren't the ones who die, they don't care much. Americans have little concept of collective responsibility. If things get bad enough, eventually Americans will take note, but it has to be pretty bad.

Other cultures have a notion of collective responsibility  and/or a government that will enforce that responsibility. In Japan, the Prime Minister has no power to order people to work from home. However, when he asked, they did. Enforcement wasn't needed. Most countries with this sense of responsibility are culturally homogeneous. Those that aren't have very strong central governments with widespread powers (Singapore).

  I disagree with you.  Americans have a strong sense of “collective responsibility”. According to The a World Giving Index,  Americans are the most generous people on the planet. It’s a United Kingdom organization and maybe it’s full of garbage I don’t know. But I have read similar studies that suggest the same thing.

 And Americans always rally to a cause -  such as a natural disaster. With h.u.g.e sums of money and sweat equity being donated.

This is different for a couple reasons. One, you can’t see it. It’s not like a hurricane or tornado that destroys a city or town. Two it has an economic component that no matter how much one wants to deny it, exists.  I’m sorry, but I’ll say it again, I think it’s very easy for most of the people on this board to criticize those who are in a “hurry“ to get things open and working again. Because I think most of the people on this board are older, and economically set.  Thus they (we) can handle it. It’s a tad different when you’re living paycheck to paycheck and you lose a job, you’re 35 years old, the risk to you is not all that high and you have mouths to feed. 

So again – I’m not willing to throw the American people under the bus or cower in shame because we’re not acting like the Chinese, Singapore or the ***** Germans. And I’m not gonna apologize one iota for that.

Americans are willing to throw money at things they perceive as a problem. Many are not willing to inconvenience themselves for it. I'm not talking about staying home from work. I'm talking about wearing a mask, not holding social gatherings, not eating at indoor restaurants, not going to bars. On my two block street, everyone appears to be doing the right thing except for one family. They have had at least two massive parties over the past three months, with at least 100 people packed into their yard and walking into their home without masks and without social distancing. This is the narcissistic behavior that is keeping this thing going at a high level.

[Mick]

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right.  It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame.  Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

Good question. I think the answer is that Americans look at it from the point of view "What maximizes my happiness?". They would rather do things that make them happy or richer even if that increases the spread of the virus and others may die because of it. As long as they aren't the ones who die, they don't care much. Americans have little concept of collective responsibility. If things get bad enough, eventually Americans will take note, but it has to be pretty bad.

Other cultures have a notion of collective responsibility  and/or a government that will enforce that responsibility. In Japan, the Prime Minister has no power to order people to work from home. However, when he asked, they did. Enforcement wasn't needed. Most countries with this sense of responsibility are culturally homogeneous. Those that aren't have very strong central governments with widespread powers (Singapore).

  I disagree with you.  Americans have a strong sense of “collective responsibility”. According to The a World Giving Index,  Americans are the most generous people on the planet. It’s a United Kingdom organization and maybe it’s full of garbage I don’t know. But I have read similar studies that suggest the same thing.

 And Americans always rally to a cause -  such as a natural disaster. With h.u.g.e sums of money and sweat equity being donated.

This is different for a couple reasons. One, you can’t see it. It’s not like a hurricane or tornado that destroys a city or town. Two it has an economic component that no matter how much one wants to deny it, exists.  I’m sorry, but I’ll say it again, I think it’s very easy for most of the people on this board to criticize those who are in a “hurry“ to get things open and working again. Because I think most of the people on this board are older, and economically set.  Thus they (we) can handle it. It’s a tad different when you’re living paycheck to paycheck and you lose a job, you’re 35 years old, the risk to you is not all that high and you have mouths to feed. 

So again – I’m not willing to throw the American people under the bus or cower in shame because we’re not acting like the Chinese, Singapore or the ***** Germans. And I’m not gonna apologize one iota for that.

I actually agree with both of you, and I think it was a perfect storm scenario.  This is a situation in which, essentially, inaction was called for and powerful people have a bias towards action.  And America is the most powerful country on earth, and Americans think of themselves as such.  We don't like what inaction suggests: shutting down the economy, isolating oneself from others, giving up personal freedoms that were won in blood over hundreds of years.  Factor into account the general lack of health among Americans, and candidly...I don't think whoever sat in the White House was going to change that much.  Yes, we destroyed the lives of millions of non-elite people, and the Media Elite, the Liberal Elite, the Conservative Elite, the Business Elite and the rest of the Political Elite didn't give two sxxts about the regular working joe...because the Elites don't have to.  Their jobs and their money will always be there.  They're isolated from the concerns of everyday Americans.  Shut down the economy for months and throw 55 million people out of work?  No sweat.  Had to be done, because we had to flatten the curve.

Last night's debate was interesting, but the most interesting part, for me, came right out of the gate.  The moderator's question to Kamala Harris was "What would you have done differently from Trump/Pence regarding the response to the pandemic?"  I thought it was a perfect trap question to obliterate Pence.  Any time there's a perceived failure after a ten month effort, any thinking person should be able to destroy the plan/process of the other side.

Turns out it was a trap question for Harris.  She railed against the inadequacies of the Trump/Pence approach...but she didn't say what she and Biden would have done differently, other than initiate contact tracing earlier.  I was waiting for her 10-point-seal-of-approval-here's-what-we-would-have-done-differently -- and I didn't hear it. That was an "uh oh" moment for me. If you want to supplant a sitting president, you need to do more than criticize him -- you need to show how you would have done it better. She didn't.

As for the NEJM's endorsement, I'm not too surprised.  Biden/Harris would be much better for the medical community, because Biden/Harris will ensure that more money gets thrown at health care, pretty much across the board.  It's good for their business, so they endorsed Biden/Harris.

[Mick]

Freedom to spread the coronavirus is not an inalienable right.  It was not only China that shut down the virus, virtually all East Asia countries put the US response to shame.  Why is this one category where the usually competitive Americans are satisfied to fail?

Good question. I think the answer is that Americans look at it from the point of view "What maximizes my happiness?". They would rather do things that make them happy or richer even if that increases the spread of the virus and others may die because of it. As long as they aren't the ones who die, they don't care much. Americans have little concept of collective responsibility. If things get bad enough, eventually Americans will take note, but it has to be pretty bad.

Other cultures have a notion of collective responsibility  and/or a government that will enforce that responsibility. In Japan, the Prime Minister has no power to order people to work from home. However, when he asked, they did. Enforcement wasn't needed. Most countries with this sense of responsibility are culturally homogeneous. Those that aren't have very strong central governments with widespread powers (Singapore).

  I disagree with you.  Americans have a strong sense of “collective responsibility”. According to The a World Giving Index,  Americans are the most generous people on the planet. It’s a United Kingdom organization and maybe it’s full of garbage I don’t know. But I have read similar studies that suggest the same thing.

 And Americans always rally to a cause -  such as a natural disaster. With h.u.g.e sums of money and sweat equity being donated.

This is different for a couple reasons. One, you can’t see it. It’s not like a hurricane or tornado that destroys a city or town. Two it has an economic component that no matter how much one wants to deny it, exists.  I’m sorry, but I’ll say it again, I think it’s very easy for most of the people on this board to criticize those who are in a “hurry“ to get things open and working again. Because I think most of the people on this board are older, and economically set.  Thus they (we) can handle it. It’s a tad different when you’re living paycheck to paycheck and you lose a job, you’re 35 years old, the risk to you is not all that high and you have mouths to feed. 

So again – I’m not willing to throw the American people under the bus or cower in shame because we’re not acting like the Chinese, Singapore or the ***** Germans. And I’m not gonna apologize one iota for that.

I actually agree with both of you, and I think it was a perfect storm scenario.  This is a situation in which, essentially, inaction was called for and powerful people have a bias towards action.  And America is the most powerful country on earth, and Americans think of themselves as such.  We don't like what inaction suggests: shutting down the economy, isolating oneself from others, giving up personal freedoms that were won in blood over hundreds of years.  Factor into account the general lack of health among Americans, and candidly...I don't think whoever sat in the White House was going to change that much.  Yes, we destroyed the lives of millions of non-elite people, and the Media Elite, the Liberal Elite, the Conservative Elite, the Business Elite and the rest of the Political Elite didn't give two sxxts about the regular working joe...because the Elites don't have to.  Their jobs and their money will always be there.  They're isolated from the concerns of everyday Americans.  Shut down the economy for months and throw 55 million people out of work?  No sweat.  Had to be done, because we had to flatten the curve.

Last night's debate was interesting, but the most interesting part, for me, came right out of the gate.  The moderator's question to Kamala Harris was "What would you have done differently from Trump/Pence regarding the response to the pandemic?"  I thought it was a perfect trap question to obliterate Pence.  Any time there's a perceived failure after a ten month effort, any thinking person should be able to destroy the plan/process of the other side.

Turns out it was a trap question for Harris.  She railed against the inadequacies of the Trump/Pence approach...but she didn't say what she and Biden would have done differently, other than initiate contact tracing earlier.  I was waiting for her 10-point-seal-of-approval-here's-what-we-would-have-done-differently -- and I didn't hear it. That was an "uh oh" moment for me. If you want to supplant a sitting president, you need to do more than criticize him -- you need to show how you would have done it better. She didn't.

As for the NEJM's endorsement, I'm not too surprised.  Biden/Harris would be much better for the medical community, because Biden/Harris will ensure that more money gets thrown at health care, pretty much across the board.  It's good for their business, so they endorsed Biden/Harris.

[Goose]

 I disagree with you.  Americans have a strong sense of “collective responsibility”. According to The a World Giving Index,  Americans are the most generous people on the planet. It’s a United Kingdom organization and maybe it’s full of garbage I don’t know. But I have read similar studies that suggest the same thing.

I think your example from The World Giving Index shows that Americans have a strong sense of INDIVIDUAL responsibility. People donate what they want, when they want, and to whom they want. They often give generously. They don't ask their neighbors how much and to what they donated. If somebody did nothing at all, you don't know it.

In societies where responsibility is collective, not individual, you are either shamed into or compelled to do what society expects. Many of these societies institutionalize the "safety net" into the government, so one has no choice in the matter. This works fine if the people in the society really do support the level of compulsion involved. It also works fine if the level of compulsion isn't under the control of society at large (China, Singapore). The "We are all in this together" idea can work if "we" and "together" is a real possibility. In the USA, we haven't ever approached that level of "we", let alone "together".

And Americans always rally to a cause -  such as a natural disaster. With h.u.g.e sums of money and sweat equity being donated.







This is different for a couple reasons. One, you can’t see it. It’s not like a hurricane or tornado that destroys a city or town. Two it has an economic component that no matter how much one wants to deny it, exists.  I’m sorry, but I’ll say it again, I think it’s very easy for most of the people on this board to criticize those who are in a “hurry“ to get things open and working again. Because I think most of the people on this board are older, and economically set.  Thus they (we) can handle it. It’s a tad different when you’re living paycheck to paycheck and you lose a job, you’re 35 years old, the risk to you is not all that high and you have mouths to feed.

In the USA, it is a tad different. The people living paycheck to paycheck have the option of not complying. They won't get arrested, and their neighbors won't shun them. In fact, probably nobody will say a thing. In Singapore, they will get arrested, and it doesn't matter if they are poor and need the work. In societies like Japan, Taiwan, Korea, etc. your responsibility to the society transcends the fact it will cost you money and pain. In general, these just aren't admissible reasons to not comply. (OK, there are people everywhere who ignore social norms. Many fewer in some societies than others however.) 



You are correct IMHO that most people on this board are more free to chose a response that costs them money, or in a situation where being careful doesn't cost them money. They also like being "right". That makes them happy. You are also correct that the fact this virus is an "invisible" threat makes it harder to get peoples attention. What isn't talked about enough IMHO, especially on this board, is that almost all pronouncements regarding public policies to combat this virus come with a high level of uncertainty. This fact is ignored by many people on all sides of the issues. We haven't seen this virus before. We don't know exactly how many possible mitigations will play out, especially when the level of compliance is unpredictable in advance. This is one reason why many people feel the POTUS has made things worse by taking contrarian positions on many possible actions (eg. masks).



What is now missing (and used to be present) in our society is the idea that when "authorities" (State and County in this case) tell you to do something, you do it, even if you don't believe in the policy and the policy may not work. Further, the authorities have the duty and obligation to ensure that you do comply. You are free not to like it. You can protest against it. You can speak out against it. You can support candidates that will take a different approach. You can ask for financial assistance to make compliance less painful, which you may or may not get. However, until the rules change, you comply and/or they make you comply. That allowed our free society to work somewhat efficiently in the presence of significant uncertainty and disagreement. Without this type of agreement by the populace, where people feel free to decide everything for themselves, chaos is the inevitable result.

So again – I’m not willing to throw the American people under the bus or cower in shame because we’re not acting like the Chinese, Singapore or the ***** Germans. And I’m not gonna apologize one iota for that.

On this we agree. I believe our society has many critical advantages. However IMHO, we have become far too concerned with our rights and not concerned at all with our responsibilities. We have forgotten that democracy works only if people obey all the laws, not just the ones they like. We have to do this even if it costs us blood and treasure. We have also elected politicians who will not forcefully remind us of that fact and compel us to comply when necessary. We need to act not like other nations, but like Americans who understand both our rights and our responsibilities.

[Goose]

 I disagree with you.  Americans have a strong sense of “collective responsibility”. According to The a World Giving Index,  Americans are the most generous people on the planet. It’s a United Kingdom organization and maybe it’s full of garbage I don’t know. But I have read similar studies that suggest the same thing.

I think your example from The World Giving Index shows that Americans have a strong sense of INDIVIDUAL responsibility. People donate what they want, when they want, and to whom they want. They often give generously. They don't ask their neighbors how much and to what they donated. If somebody did nothing at all, you don't know it.

In societies where responsibility is collective, not individual, you are either shamed into or compelled to do what society expects. Many of these societies institutionalize the "safety net" into the government, so one has no choice in the matter. This works fine if the people in the society really do support the level of compulsion involved. It also works fine if the level of compulsion isn't under the control of society at large (China, Singapore). The "We are all in this together" idea can work if "we" and "together" is a real possibility. In the USA, we haven't ever approached that level of "we", let alone "together".

And Americans always rally to a cause -  such as a natural disaster. With h.u.g.e sums of money and sweat equity being donated.







This is different for a couple reasons. One, you can’t see it. It’s not like a hurricane or tornado that destroys a city or town. Two it has an economic component that no matter how much one wants to deny it, exists.  I’m sorry, but I’ll say it again, I think it’s very easy for most of the people on this board to criticize those who are in a “hurry“ to get things open and working again. Because I think most of the people on this board are older, and economically set.  Thus they (we) can handle it. It’s a tad different when you’re living paycheck to paycheck and you lose a job, you’re 35 years old, the risk to you is not all that high and you have mouths to feed.

In the USA, it is a tad different. The people living paycheck to paycheck have the option of not complying. They won't get arrested, and their neighbors won't shun them. In fact, probably nobody will say a thing. In Singapore, they will get arrested, and it doesn't matter if they are poor and need the work. In societies like Japan, Taiwan, Korea, etc. your responsibility to the society transcends the fact it will cost you money and pain. In general, these just aren't admissible reasons to not comply. (OK, there are people everywhere who ignore social norms. Many fewer in some societies than others however.) 



You are correct IMHO that most people on this board are more free to chose a response that costs them money, or in a situation where being careful doesn't cost them money. They also like being "right". That makes them happy. You are also correct that the fact this virus is an "invisible" threat makes it harder to get peoples attention. What isn't talked about enough IMHO, especially on this board, is that almost all pronouncements regarding public policies to combat this virus come with a high level of uncertainty. This fact is ignored by many people on all sides of the issues. We haven't seen this virus before. We don't know exactly how many possible mitigations will play out, especially when the level of compliance is unpredictable in advance. This is one reason why many people feel the POTUS has made things worse by taking contrarian positions on many possible actions (eg. masks).



What is now missing (and used to be present) in our society is the idea that when "authorities" (State and County in this case) tell you to do something, you do it, even if you don't believe in the policy and the policy may not work. Further, the authorities have the duty and obligation to ensure that you do comply. You are free not to like it. You can protest against it. You can speak out against it. You can support candidates that will take a different approach. You can ask for financial assistance to make compliance less painful, which you may or may not get. However, until the rules change, you comply and/or they make you comply. That allowed our free society to work somewhat efficiently in the presence of significant uncertainty and disagreement. Without this type of agreement by the populace, where people feel free to decide everything for themselves, chaos is the inevitable result.

So again – I’m not willing to throw the American people under the bus or cower in shame because we’re not acting like the Chinese, Singapore or the ***** Germans. And I’m not gonna apologize one iota for that.

On this we agree. I believe our society has many critical advantages. However IMHO, we have become far too concerned with our rights and not concerned at all with our responsibilities. We have forgotten that democracy works only if people obey all the laws, not just the ones they like. We have to do this even if it costs us blood and treasure. We have also elected politicians who will not forcefully remind us of that fact and compel us to comply when necessary. We need to act not like other nations, but like Americans who understand both our rights and our responsibilities.

[chrisk]

How often do you see a candidate endorsement in which no names are mentioned?

[chrisk]

How often do you see a candidate endorsement in which no names are mentioned?

[BostonCard]

1) The New England Journal frequently wades into politics, just not political races.  It has featured editorials on Obamacare, abortion, right to try laws, health insurance, and that's just ones I remember off the top of my head.  What's new is that this is the first time they have made an implicit endorsement for a candidate.

2) While there is a lot of talk about "this would have never worked in the US because 'culture'", rather than give up pre-emptively, I would have liked to see a concerted effort across all levels of government and the media to give a clear and consistent message before saying "it's impossible".  Maybe we don't get result slike Taiwan or Singapore, but even Canada or Germany would have been a significant improvement.

BC

[BostonCard]

1) The New England Journal frequently wades into politics, just not political races.  It has featured editorials on Obamacare, abortion, right to try laws, health insurance, and that's just ones I remember off the top of my head.  What's new is that this is the first time they have made an implicit endorsement for a candidate.

2) While there is a lot of talk about "this would have never worked in the US because 'culture'", rather than give up pre-emptively, I would have liked to see a concerted effort across all levels of government and the media to give a clear and consistent message before saying "it's impossible".  Maybe we don't get result slike Taiwan or Singapore, but even Canada or Germany would have been a significant improvement.

BC

[murky]

Pretty unprecedented.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/07/healt...trump.html

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2029812

I don't subscribe to the Times, so haven't read the body, but the headline is misleading.  

The NEJM hasn't joined Never Trumpers, they've become no more Trumpers based on what they've seen from his presidency.

Never Trumper implies they were always against him, irrespective of what he actually does and says.

[murky]

Pretty unprecedented.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/07/healt...trump.html

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2029812

I don't subscribe to the Times, so haven't read the body, but the headline is misleading.  

The NEJM hasn't joined Never Trumpers, they've become no more Trumpers based on what they've seen from his presidency.

Never Trumper implies they were always against him, irrespective of what he actually does and says.

[oregontim]

... Yeah we can easily do the same types of measures China does. Our governments are so similar as are our cultures. Or Singapore. Anyone ready for a caning? Give me a break. Which is why the New England Journal of Medicine should stick to medicine and stay out of politics. They lose credibility when they do something like this.  And in so doing -  they help Trump.

China and Singapore in this context are between them a bit of a straw man. The NEJM editorial posted compares us not just to China and Singapore, but also South Korea, New Zealand, even Kazakhstan, Zimbabwe, and Ethiopia, and, by implication, the rest of the world. We have 20% of the stats with 4% of the population. We're roughly 4-5 times worse than the norm.


I strongly object to excusing or normalizing the disastrous and probably criminal behavior of Trump and enablers because we, as a nation, are supposedly incapable. No, we aren't (yet) an autocratic lock-down nation like China and Singapore, and we are indeed capable of uniting around a disaster. Our "don't tread on me" streak doesn't mean we don't all stop at red lights and wear seat belts. Under any of the other 12 presidents of my lifetime, we would have had a death toll roughly equivalent to our share of the world population.


We are a nation whose president told us not to worry. Whose president took wearing a mask as an offense to him. Whose president ignored and distracted us, positioned caution itself as an evil conspiracy against his person. Remember "liberate Michigan" and "liberate Virginia?" He actively and on purpose undermined the CDC and the FDA. Earlier this week he explicitly, in writing, told an entire nation "don't be afraid of Covid."


[tweet]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313186529058136070?s=20[/tweet]


So don't tell me we're too unruly to come together like other nations have. We are the only whose leadership openly attacked and undermined normal measures.

[oregontim]

... Yeah we can easily do the same types of measures China does. Our governments are so similar as are our cultures. Or Singapore. Anyone ready for a caning? Give me a break. Which is why the New England Journal of Medicine should stick to medicine and stay out of politics. They lose credibility when they do something like this.  And in so doing -  they help Trump.

China and Singapore in this context are between them a bit of a straw man. The NEJM editorial posted compares us not just to China and Singapore, but also South Korea, New Zealand, even Kazakhstan, Zimbabwe, and Ethiopia, and, by implication, the rest of the world. We have 20% of the stats with 4% of the population. We're roughly 4-5 times worse than the norm.


I strongly object to excusing or normalizing the disastrous and probably criminal behavior of Trump and enablers because we, as a nation, are supposedly incapable. No, we aren't (yet) an autocratic lock-down nation like China and Singapore, and we are indeed capable of uniting around a disaster. Our "don't tread on me" streak doesn't mean we don't all stop at red lights and wear seat belts. Under any of the other 12 presidents of my lifetime, we would have had a death toll roughly equivalent to our share of the world population.


We are a nation whose president told us not to worry. Whose president took wearing a mask as an offense to him. Whose president ignored and distracted us, positioned caution itself as an evil conspiracy against his person. Remember "liberate Michigan" and "liberate Virginia?" He actively and on purpose undermined the CDC and the FDA. Earlier this week he explicitly, in writing, told an entire nation "don't be afraid of Covid."


[tweet]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313186529058136070?s=20[/tweet]


So don't tell me we're too unruly to come together like other nations have. We are the only whose leadership openly attacked and undermined normal measures.

[Goose]

Americans are willing to throw money at things they perceive as a problem. Many are not willing to inconvenience themselves for it. I'm not talking about staying home from work. I'm talking about wearing a mask, not holding social gatherings, not eating at indoor restaurants, not going to bars. On my two block street, everyone appears to be doing the right thing except for one family. They have had at least two massive parties over the past three months, with at least 100 people packed into their yard and walking into their home without masks and without social distancing. This is the narcissistic behavior that is keeping this thing going at a high level.

Basically agree with your evaluation. I would also guess that nobody has "had a word with them" either. In my larger community, we have some of this. We also have a lot more examples of people who are trying to follow the rules except when they don't. They mostly social distance from the neighbors but they let their children associate with whatever and however many children happen to show up. Sometimes its 20 or more kids. Many of those kids are not "local". Probably doesn't matter 99.95% of the time, except when it does. Americans aren't great at consistency. We work real hard at "doing it right" and then turn around and do something completely opposite.

---

Our "don't tread on me" streak doesn't mean we don't all stop at red lights and wear seat belts.

Great examples! If you run a red light, you get a ticket. What happens if you don't wear a mask when you are supposed to do so? Generally nothing, because store clerks aren't policemen. We wear seat belts, except those (quite a few of us) who don't. If we get caught not wearing a seat belt, we get a ticket. There is (and needs to be) enforcement. Quite frankly, nobody in the USA has the balls to do the same with masks.
Seat belts are a good example in another way. Oregontim is old enough (I think) to remember the sequence of how we got where we are. The world had data that made a pretty good case that seat belts saved lives from racing accidents. They were made optional equipment on new cars. Few people bought them, but the few that did improved the safety numbers. As a result, seat belts were made mandatory on all new cars. Shortly thereafter, they were made mandatory on all automobiles. I well remember watching my father install the retrofit kit in out 1956 Mercury Monterey. So everybody had seat belts, but despite the fact everybody KNEW they saved lives, most people didn't wear them. So they finally made laws that you had to do so. That helped, but compliance was still well short of universal. Finally they started enforcement. This entire process took roughly 30 YEARS. There was no Trump. It was just Americans behaving as they often do. Unlike masks, there was the equivalent of placebo controlled studies. There was no question one was safer wearing a seat belt. But it still took time for education and enforcement of the law to finally get close to universal compliance.

[Goose]

Americans are willing to throw money at things they perceive as a problem. Many are not willing to inconvenience themselves for it. I'm not talking about staying home from work. I'm talking about wearing a mask, not holding social gatherings, not eating at indoor restaurants, not going to bars. On my two block street, everyone appears to be doing the right thing except for one family. They have had at least two massive parties over the past three months, with at least 100 people packed into their yard and walking into their home without masks and without social distancing. This is the narcissistic behavior that is keeping this thing going at a high level.

Basically agree with your evaluation. I would also guess that nobody has "had a word with them" either. In my larger community, we have some of this. We also have a lot more examples of people who are trying to follow the rules except when they don't. They mostly social distance from the neighbors but they let their children associate with whatever and however many children happen to show up. Sometimes its 20 or more kids. Many of those kids are not "local". Probably doesn't matter 99.95% of the time, except when it does. Americans aren't great at consistency. We work real hard at "doing it right" and then turn around and do something completely opposite.

---

Our "don't tread on me" streak doesn't mean we don't all stop at red lights and wear seat belts.

Great examples! If you run a red light, you get a ticket. What happens if you don't wear a mask when you are supposed to do so? Generally nothing, because store clerks aren't policemen. We wear seat belts, except those (quite a few of us) who don't. If we get caught not wearing a seat belt, we get a ticket. There is (and needs to be) enforcement. Quite frankly, nobody in the USA has the balls to do the same with masks.
Seat belts are a good example in another way. Oregontim is old enough (I think) to remember the sequence of how we got where we are. The world had data that made a pretty good case that seat belts saved lives from racing accidents. They were made optional equipment on new cars. Few people bought them, but the few that did improved the safety numbers. As a result, seat belts were made mandatory on all new cars. Shortly thereafter, they were made mandatory on all automobiles. I well remember watching my father install the retrofit kit in out 1956 Mercury Monterey. So everybody had seat belts, but despite the fact everybody KNEW they saved lives, most people didn't wear them. So they finally made laws that you had to do so. That helped, but compliance was still well short of universal. Finally they started enforcement. This entire process took roughly 30 YEARS. There was no Trump. It was just Americans behaving as they often do. Unlike masks, there was the equivalent of placebo controlled studies. There was no question one was safer wearing a seat belt. But it still took time for education and enforcement of the law to finally get close to universal compliance.