https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-13/coronavirus-pandemic-california-texas-suffer-after-taking-different-strategies

Hopefully this hasn't been posted in here before - from January 13th.

Quote:

---

When the novel coronavirus struck, California embraced lockdowns and mask mandates. Texas resisted them. Yet almost a year since the U.S. recorded its first Covid-19 case, the two most populous states, so often seen as opposites, find themselves in similar shape, with crippled economies and higher casualties than most nations.

It's easier to shop, dine, and pray in Texas than in California, where most of its almost 40 million people are living under some form of lockdown. But the states' unemployment rates are virtually the same: 8.1% in Texas and 8.2% in California. Each state has lost about 30,000 people to the coronavirus. Texas has seen 103 Covid-19 patients die for every 100,000 people since the start of the pandemic, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In California the ratio is 75.

Public health experts say the grim statistics illustrate the limits of their field. Government orders can make a differencea big one. But barring draconian measures, such as China placing the city of Wuhan under virtual house arrest, what matters most may be the daily choices of individuals.

---

There was a similar article in the economist a couple weeks ago.

California didn't save many lives by shutting down, and Texas didn't save many business by staying open. You can throw Florida and New York in as well as places that took totally different approaches and got the same results.

Seems like the government response was pretty irrelevant. Enough people would socialize to spread the virus, but enough people would also be worried enough to kill the economy.

So then leave it up to the individuals. Clear cut solution.

It's all the "individuals" who scream for the government to "do something". The only option to really stop the health and economic disaster was to control the virus. It doesn't matter if you thought the virus was aidsebola or a weak ass flu, it was clear from the beginning that just ignoring it wouldn't work.

I thought conservatives were supposed to see the world as it is, not how they hoped it would be.

Not a straw man.

It doesn't matter if you think the people who disagree with you are rational, irrational, bat **** crazy, or somewhere in between. Calling them dumbasses on Texags doesn't make them disappear. Policy has to get buy in from lots of people to work.

amercer said:

---

It's all the "individuals" who scream for the government to "do something". The only option to really stop the health and economic disaster was to control the virus. It doesn't matter if you thought the virus was aidsebola or a weak ass flu, it was clear from the beginning that just ignoring it wouldn't work.

I thought conservatives were supposed to see the world as it is, not how they hoped it would be.

---

"Individuals" don't scream for the government to "do something". It's called being a responsible adult and not expecting a handout from cradle to grave.

How the hell do you people even survive without nanny government to tell you what to do.

Speaking for myself, but I do what's in my own best interest sans governmental policy one way or the other, and which typically involves trusting no one to behave rationally given the majority of folks out there sole source their news and will die on the hill arguing for political points and pride.

How I wish we had contained it. And I understand even more why it was so critical to contain it early on. Not only would countless lives have been saved, but we would've avoided all the ensuring problems - restrictions, mask vs no mask, the burden on our healthcare workers and so many other essential workers.

Unfortunately, viruses are inevitable on this planet. I can only hope that future generations learn from this pandemic when the next one hits....

What we needed was middle of the road, straight line truth from politicians. Instead we got politics and dumbassery

Explain how it spreads, how social distancing, masks..etc can help both the economy and reduce spread. Make it a call to national pride and patriotism to reduce economic damage and death

It's not rocket science but I don't think a chunk of the population understands it still, some 12 months later

Marissa99 said:

---

How I wish we had contained it. And I understand even more why it was so critical to contain it early on. Not only would countless lives have been saved, but we would've avoided all the ensuring problems - restrictions, mask vs no mask, the burden on our healthcare workers and so many other essential workers.

Unfortunately, viruses are inevitable on this planet. I can only hope that future generations learn from this pandemic when the next one hits....

---

Learn? Learn what? That highly contagious viruses with a .5% fatality rate can't be contained with NPIs? And the reason cases started dropping in Feb 2021 was due to seasonality + herd immunity, not vaccines?

Or that the reason southern island countries were able to stop covid spread was because of seasonality + being far isolated from every other country, which is completely impossible for a majority of NA?

PJYoung said:

---

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-13/coronavirus-pandemic-california-texas-suffer-after-taking-different-strategies

Hopefully this hasn't been posted in here before - from January 13th.

Quote:

---

When the novel coronavirus struck, California embraced lockdowns and mask mandates. Texas resisted them. Yet almost a year since the U.S. recorded its first Covid-19 case, the two most populous states, so often seen as opposites, find themselves in similar shape, with crippled economies and higher casualties than most nations.

It's easier to shop, dine, and pray in Texas than in California, where most of its almost 40 million people are living under some form of lockdown. But the states' unemployment rates are virtually the same: 8.1% in Texas and 8.2% in California. Each state has lost about 30,000 people to the coronavirus. Texas has seen 103 Covid-19 patients die for every 100,000 people since the start of the pandemic, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In California the ratio is 75.

Public health experts say the grim statistics illustrate the limits of their field. Government orders can make a differencea big one. But barring draconian measures, such as China placing the city of Wuhan under virtual house arrest, what matters most may be the daily choices of individuals.

---

---

That's a very misleading article and a shortsighted scope. Think ahead to 5 years, 10 years, and see what the damage is like.

That article used data that happened to be the same when it was written. A month later Texas was 7.2% and California up to 9%.

Marissa99 said:

---

If we know that viruses are inevitable, wouldn't mankind want to do what is necessary to a) save lives b) avoid infections that could lead to long term health problems and c) avoid all the turmoil that had been caused? Those are just a few of the things that come to mind.

Therefore, wouldn't you want to contain any new virus that you know absolutely nothing about?

I think there is plenty to learn from. In fact, we should've learned from the 1918 pandemic but we didn't

---

The 1918 pandemic was different, it killed the young and healthy. Once we figured out what populations were susceptible, and that the fatality rate was minuscule minus the rare outlier for the majority of working aged and kids, we should have isolated the vulnerable as best we could and the rest of us should have been full speed ahead.

Now for example, if this had a 1% fatality rate amongst a marine infantry company, that would have to have been dealt with differently.

The old, sick, and obese die. It's what they do.

It's all the "individuals" who scream for the government to "do something". The only option to really stop the health and economic disaster was to control the virus. It doesn't matter if you thought the virus was aidsebola or a weak ass flu, it was clear from the beginning that just ignoring it wouldn't work.

I thought conservatives were supposed to see the world as it is, not how they hoped it would be.

The idea that we could ever "control" the virus is pure insanity. Science, common sense and statistics agree with me.

This was never about the "virus". It was and continues to be political.

You can imagine any number of "tail risks" or Black Swans or whatever you want to call extremely rare and unpredictable events, but if you care to or attempt to address them all, you are bankrupt.

I can go Google "superbug", "coming pandemic", "virus x", or various other headlines from the last 10 years (covers of Time, the Economist and several others come to mind and I'm barely a magazine reader) and easily claim that "we should have known". In fact, there was plenty of warning about this coming pandemic (timing notwithstanding), and, as you note, plenty of history to confirm its potential.

So what did you do to prepare? What will you do now? To what extent will you go to prepare for the next disease (and you don't even know what bodily system it will impact), or ice storm, or hurricane, or unknown trama? Are you ensuring yourself against lightning, a car wreck or a falling tree?

How many taxes will you pay to ensure against the next big problem? How many arguments can we have about which potential problem is the next big problem? Who chooses the problem to attack, and which policy options?

Feel free to ruin your life being afraid of every potential thing, and spending your dimes on every potential fix. But it's not for me.

Life is fragile, as it has always been. We take rational defense against rational risks, and we rely on the human miracle, our ingenuity and great resources to respond when we must (no different than the human body does). And we live. Not in fear, but in full acknowledgement that life is already fleeting and, in fact, a gift.

amercer said:

---

It's all the "individuals" who scream for the government to "do something". The only option to really stop the health and economic disaster was to control the virus. It doesn't matter if you thought the virus was aidsebola or a weak ass flu, it was clear from the beginning that just ignoring it wouldn't work.

I thought conservatives were supposed to see the world as it is, not how they hoped it would be.

---

When you say the only option was to control the virus, I think the problem is there is no proven way to do that. Many places used masks, lockdowns, and other measures to little or no effect. The only nations that somewhat succeeded were island nations with relatively small populations that could close their borders entirely and lock people down for weeks on end.

Even the highly disciplined Germans had a major outbreak this winter despite strict interventions.

I think if you could point to an "option" that actually worked to control the virus, people would support it. Unfortunately I've seen nothing short of mass vaccination that works.