Is it reasonable to ask people to keep these two thoughts in their heads at the same time?
1. Shutting down the country was probably the best decision at the time, given what we knew then. The stats we had in February were truly frightening, and the experts were telling us a million people could die.
2. Knowing what we know now, it was a mistake. The virus is not as deadly as we thought, and — with 20-20 hindsight — we can come up with several plans that would have been better.
Are people intellectually capable of that kind of thinking? Or has outrage culture, Trump Derangement Syndrome, “Trump can do no wrong” syndrome, etc., robbed us of that ability?
Greg,
I’m not sure if we can call the shutdown a “mistake.” After all, it is quite possible that had we not shut down, hospitals would have been overrun and the death toll would be much higher. In other words, we could have seen conditions like Italy in much of the nation, not just in the New York City area and a few other hotspots. And even had the state governments not imposed shelter in place orders, the public would have likely panicked in the face of spiking coronavirus infection rates and days and would have tried to stay home anyway. That might have made things even worse than they are now.
At this point, however, yes, it is time to end the shutdown in most of the nation, albeit with some reasonable precautions in place and continued social distancing for the most vulnerable. We can’t go back to the way things were before, but now that we have largely “flattened the curve,” the priority increasingly needs to be getting the economy back up and running. The alternative is a possible economic depression and political conditions that make our current polarization look mild. Those who hate Trump may pine for him one day if we end up with an economic depression and a real fascist on the right. Despite the rhetoric of some of his critics, Trump is neither a fascist, nor a dictator. Speaking of Trump, I certainly haven’t been impressed by how he has handled the coronavirus crisis, although he isn’t the only one to blame. In New York, Cuomo and De Blasio bungled things too.
I don’t know how we measure what might have been, but Sweden didn’t overrun their hospitals, and neither did NYC, despite their generally late and crappy response.
Re: Italy, I’ve been told that it’s not that uncommon for their system to be overwhelmed. Not sure if that’s true.
Florida, which was supposed to be the “New Italy,” has done okay.
So I’m inclined to believe that things are usually turning out less severe than the experts want us to believe.
“Despite the rhetoric of some of his critics, Trump is neither a fascist, nor a dictator.”
Yes. He had quite the opportunity to become one. Instead, he stressed federalism.
*”coronavirus infection rates and deaths” not “days.”
It’s a fascinating question Greg. My fear is that in today’s political climate of polarization, it’s impossible to make even a semi-nuanced argument, and thus no, it’s not possible to think that way for the politically engaged.
In California it seems the only reason there’s been any relaxing by the government is because of the immense public pressure to do so. I think they’d keep things locked down for years until a vaccine came if they could.
From the perspective of your post, the question becomes why are they so stubborn? A few possibilities that all seem reasonable to debate:
1. They fear the blow back of admitting they were “wrong”, because they don’t think the “we had limited information” excuse will go over well. Better to double down than admit failure.
2. They’re slow to change their ideological perspective on this pandemic. i.e., they still believe it will kill us all, not because they’re “following the data” (despite what they say) but because it’s a hard thing to change an ideological perspective.
3. They genuinely think that the lock-down prevented catastrophe. (As RR points out, we really don’t know for sure what would have happened had we not done it.)
And obviously it need not be only one of the above options, it could be a combination (as well as additional things I haven’t considered). Personally, I think it’s 50% #1, 40% #2 and 10% #3.
Another possible reason: they think the longer they keep things closed down, the less likely Trump will win re-election.
I’m wondering why the story on masks has changed. The experts used to tell us that masks didn’t help. Now they’re telling us to wear them.
A possible answer is that they were downplaying masks before to keep the public from buying masks that health care workers really needed. I understand that, but the bottom line would still be that they were spreading false health information in pursuit of some other public policy goal, which justifies suspicions that they are continuing to do that.
I really hope that the Trump re-election theory isn’t true. What’s worse is that I think it would backfire. I’ve never seen more Californian’s dissatisfied with the Democrats as right now. People who hate Trump all of a sudden thinking our governor (Newsom) is just as bad if not worse.
QUOTE: I’ve never seen more Californian’s dissatisfied with the Democrats as right now. People who hate Trump all of a sudden thinking our governor (Newsom) is just as bad if not worse.
@Ken, is this a broad sentiment or within specific circles? A new poll doesn’t seem to support this sentiment (see link). https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/05/12/coronavirus-most-californians-remain-uncomfortable-going-to-restaurants-gyms-according-to-poll/#comments
Another recent poll, showed state leaders like Newsom and Mike DeWine, who each took swift action to shut down their state’s economies quickly and have prioritized public health throughout the pandemic, are popular in their home states. Almost 8 in 10 (79 percent) of adults in California approved of Newsom’s handling of the pandemic, while 86 percent of Ohioans approve of DeWine’s handling of the pandemic. On the flip side, of the dozen states included in the polling, people appear less happy with some Republican governors who acted slowly in response to the virus and are now rushing to reopen the economy.
This story reminds me of what my parents taught me as a youth…you can’t please everyone, so don’t try. Seems some Californians have been railing to get the economy back open. Now that Governor Newsom seems to be moving in that direction (with film/TV), some want to put on the brakes and think he’s crazy for considering it. I guess no good deed goes unpunished after all.
https://www.fool.com/investing/2020/05/21/california-governor-wants-to-restart-movie-and-tv.aspx
I wouldn’t put it past the Democrats to attempt to prolong the shutdown in order to hinder the economy and thus Trump’s re-election prospects. On the other hand, I wouldn’t put it past Trump and the Republicans to push for re-opening to help their chances at the polls in November. In fact, they have been pushing for that for some time. The one thing that unfortunately hasn’t changed with the coronavirus pandemic is political polarization and the political games both sides play. That said, if the public comes to believe that one side or the other is just playing politics with the situation, the blowback in November could be fierce. Playing politics too much with this is akin to playing with fire.
Given that it is now May and the country (and especially in my area) has largely flattened the curve, I continue to maintain that the most rational course of action is open the economy up, albeit with reasonable protective, social distancing and sanitary measures put in place to keep the number of new coronavirus cases manageable. And of course, the most vulnerable (the elderly, those with underlying health issues) should continue to shelter in place or take more extensive precautions. We can’t fully return to normal, but on balance, given the facts, it is time to open up the economy.
QUOTE: The one thing that unfortunately hasn’t changed with the coronavirus pandemic is political polarization and the political games both sides play.
@RR, Touche!!!…well said. Good to see you back!
You’d think a matter of life and death would be one thing that would cause us to put aside political differences and find “some” common ground. Yet, the divide continues and each side awaits opportunities to capitalize on this situation. I’m an optimist by nature, but I’m starting to believe there’s no issue that will bridge the partisan divide and tribalism. I suspect the disdain for the “other side” has grown so deep that even common sense perspectives are no longer considered if it doesn’t score points for “my side” or “my guy”.
QUOTE: I continue to maintain that the most rational course of action is open the economy up, albeit with reasonable protective, social distancing and sanitary measures put in place to keep the number of new coronavirus cases manageable. And of course, the most vulnerable (the elderly, those with underlying health issues) should continue to shelter in place or take more extensive precautions.
I agree. I don’t understand the resistance from both sides. We can’t live at no-risk and keep things closed forever. Yet, we can’t be reckless, as if there is no genuine risk. A reasonable approach, as you described, should be sought. That’s what it seemed was going to happen when the three-phased plan was introduced by the Trump administration. But, many that are opening aren’t following some of those guidelines…specifically having 14 days of decline in cases.
William,
It is good to be back! I thought Greg’s blog was gone for good until I found it again recently. I agree on all counts. It’s really a pity how polarization and tribalism seems to infect everything and prevent people from coming together, even in the face of an emergency. As with other issues such as immigration, it seems as if extremists on both sides (shutdown indefinitely vs. open ASAP) can’t tolerate a rational, nuanced, middle ground solution.
QUOTE: It’s really a pity how polarization and tribalism seems to infect everything and prevent people from coming together, even in the face of an emergency.
@RR, infect everything, did you say? Very punny! 😉 Still, point well made.
I don’t understand people with a bunker mentality that want the government to keep everything closed till there is zero risk. That’s NEVER going to happen. Why would they want that given it would ultimately work against their interests. Equally, I don’t understand people marching with signs like, “My Body, My Choice” (with a red slash across a face mask). Wait!…weren’t these the same people that railed against at the Pro-choice advocates for such a short-sighted stance? Pro-choice advocates are going to have a field-day with that one and the…”there’s more important things than life” mentality.
It truly boggles the mind what happens when people get a severe case of myopia and only live within their particular echo chamber.
Do you actually know that the people demonstrating against face masks were also against the pro-choicers?
>It truly boggles the mind what happens when people get a severe case of myopia and only live within their particular echo chamber.
Indeed. And it seems to be getting worse.
There seems to be this weird idea afloat that if you are for shutdown you are on the left, and if you are against it you are on the right. People actually seem to be embracing such a framework, though actually without justification. Shutdown could work in Trump’s favor because it puts him in the limelight. While his severe cognitive and emotional defects inhibit him in taking full advantage of such a situation, it could still enhance his position. And though avoiding the shutdown may help the economy, it may have the opposite effect if there is a second wave.
William,
Yes, I don’t understand either extreme. The bunker mentality folks seem to have moved the goalposts from “flattening the curve,” which always sounded reasonable to me, to “shelter in place until we have a cure.” That’s not realistic for the economy or civil liberties, nor is there even any guarantee that we’ll even have a vaccine one day. So it may even be needlessly destructive. On the other hand, it strikes me as reasonable to continue to wear masks in the grocery store, to continue to social distance in public, use proper sanitation, etc. And thankfully, that is what I am seeing on the limited occasions when I go out in public here locally. It is too late to totally halt the spread of the virus or ensure that nobody ever dies from it. That horse already left the barn several months ago. But we can mitigate the spread of the coronavirus and ensure that we continue to “flatten the curve” so that hospitals are never overwhelmed, which would be a huge problem for medical workers and the safety of the general public who may have other medical needs, for instance emergencies that require a visit to the ER.
That means on the other hand, however, that the folks whining about having to wear a mask or especially those protesting with guns in Michigan, are way over the top too. While I share concerns over civil liberties, especially over unnecessarily continuing the shutdown, I just don’t get their mentality. It strikes me as too individualistic and unconcerned for the common good. I agree with you that those with the “My Body, My Choice” signs aren’t doing themselves any favors. That’s a faulty, shallow slogan in the hands of pro-choice people in the abortion debate as realistically speaking, we can’t do whatever we want with our bodies (drugs, the draft, men not paying child support and expecting their bodies to stay out of jail, and murder if abortion is murder, etc.) in this country, nor should we. It’s not a good slogan in the hands of anti-shutdown and anti-mask people either.
QUOTE: On the other hand, it strikes me as reasonable to continue to wear masks in the grocery store, to continue to social distance in public, use proper sanitation, etc…. But we can mitigate the spread of the coronavirus and ensure that we continue to “flatten the curve” so that hospitals are never overwhelmed…
@RR, EXACTLY! Your commentary is like a breath of fresh air because it highlights having balance and reason. Here’s the simple truth, if we don’t work together on this, we stand the likelihood of creating a disaster in one form or another. If we don’t re-open the country, we have financial ruin looming, that could extend to several generations. On the other hand, if we prematurely rush back to “normal”, we stand the chance of creating unnecessary sickness and death. I know some like to minimize the death rate. However, it’s not just a talking point or statistic when it involves a family member or someone personally.
QUOTE: That means on the other hand, however, that the folks whining about having to wear a mask or especially those protesting with guns in Michigan, are way over the top too. While I share concerns over civil liberties, especially over unnecessarily continuing the shutdown, I just don’t get their mentality. It strikes me as too individualistic and unconcerned for the common good.
I too have concerns about civil liberties, but they have limits. That’s the part that seems to be missed by these extremists. If it only impacted them, that would be fine. Yet, in this case, their behavior could contribute to infecting others…which could be lethal for some. We have the right to free speech, but even that has limits. We can’t yell fire in a crowed building just because we “feel” we have the right. It’s also doesn’t help matters when our POTUS tweets things like “liberate Michigan”. Oy!
That said, I can’t speak for the Ohio man who posted on social media that Covid-19 was a political ploy and BS, but I suspect, having now died from the disease, he might change his stance…if he could. Yet, who knows…some just might be willing to die for a lie. Of course, that’s his choice but I wonder if he infected others, given his attitude. Now, that would truly be adding insult to injury!
I wouldn’t put it past the Democrats to attempt to prolong the shutdown in order to hinder the economy and thus Trump’s re-election prospects. On the other hand, I wouldn’t put it past Trump and the Republicans to push for re-opening to help their chances at the polls in November.
Appears you may have been on to something. Georgia, a re-opening front-runner, is under scrutiny for reporting misleading stats that make it appear as if Covid-19 cases have been declining. Seems this has happened on more than one occasion. https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/medical-advances/498521-georgia-department-of-health-under-fire-for?amp
As well, it’s not confirmed conclusively but it seems Florida is being accused of the same. We’ll see.
Everything has become political, including how you count who has died from the virus.
People were already skeptical of so-called authorities and so-called news sources. After the shameful display we’re seeing now, skepticism will only increase.
Indeed! You’d think a matter of public health/ life and death, would give pause to such politicization. Yet, it seems the public is paying attention. According to a recent poll, governors who were perceived to have acted in the best interest of their constituents, relative to Covid-19, have been seen favorably in their approval ratings by their people…Republican and Democrat alike (e.g., Maryland’s Hogan, Ohio’s DeWine, California’s Newsom, NY’s Cuomo). Yet, those who seemed to be slow to act or highly politicizing the virus were rated lower by their people (e.g., Georgia’s Kemp).
That said, speaking of shameful displays…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfiSzra0E7s
The manager should have offered to do her shopping for her.
Another thought on masks.
Are we being told to wear masks now (1) because they actually slow the spread, or (2) to ameliorate the panic we’ve created over the virus?
Greg,
It’s probably both. I’m sure people can go overboard with masks too. I’ve seen people driving by themselves while wearing a mask, which seems silly to me. I don’t do that as it seems pointless to me. But if wearing masks in public places such as stores might provide some protection to slow the spread of the coronavirus while reducing anxiety for those who have to go out in public, which helps end the shutdown, then so much the better.
QUOTE: Knowing what we know now, it was a mistake.
I agree with RR, we don’t know that this was a mistake. It’s convenient now to look back and point fingers but we simply do not know what would have happened. It seems it was a reasonable decision at the time, given our level of knowledge. As we learn more, we should adapt accordingly. I thought it was appropriate to have a phased approach to reopening the country. Yet, many that are reopening are not doing it according to guidelines that were supposedly approved by the Trump administration. Interestingly, medical science is still learning new things about this virus that could present other health risks. With the sentiment of “it’s a mistake”, I wonder if people will take the newer risks seriously or discard it as mere propaganda.
That said, I’m still waiting for the “some things are more important than life” government advocates to come forward and lead the way back to normalcy. I want to see them in hospitals, spending time in hot spots, visiting and greeting people in plants where outbreaks have occurred, dining in crowed restaurants, working out in gyms, hanging out in crowed beaches and other “normal” public activities they seem to think are fine. In fact, with Memorial Day coming up, it might be interesting to see if they will invite large groups of people to celebrate at their homes or offices.
Also, I find it interesting to see pundits speaking nonchalantly of taking a risk with children in public schools, given the percent is “allegedly ” small. Yet, I wonder if their children or relatives would be in those environments of greatest risk? To date, the place I’ve primarily seen these people is on TV giving advice on how “others” should be taking risks. According to their past rhetoric, life is precious and should be protected at all costs (when it comes to abortion). Yet, now we learn there are some things that are more important than life. When pro-choice advocates start repeating this (and they surely will), it will be interesting to see the “more important than lifers” response to that.
As well, those experts who helped devise a plan to save lives by flattening the curve are now being demonized. Some have gotten death threats. I’d like to see the naysayers’ record with predictions in novel circumstances that present public health risks. What solutions did the naysayers offer earlier this year that would have been more effective? No one has gotten it 100% correct, but generally it seems the experts were correct about what would be effective in slowing the spread of the virus. Now that it’s actually working, somehow they are the bad guys. I guess no good deed goes unpunished.
QUOTE: The virus is not as deadly as we thought, and — with 20-20 hindsight — we can come up with several plans that would have been better.
What are those better plans?
Did you read point 1?
Saying that it was a mistake does not mean they should or could have known better at the time. I look back on many mistakes I’ve made and realize I made the best decision based on what I knew at the time. I just didn’t know enough.
And what are the better plans? Well, for one simple example, New York should not have sent infected patients back to nursing homes. It also appears that children are at very low risk, so something short of closing down schools would have been better.
QUOTE: Did you read point 1?
Yes, sure did…couldn’t miss it. Included that sentiment in my response. Did you see it?
Saying that it was a mistake does not mean they should or could have known better at the time. I look back on many mistakes I’ve made and realize I made the best decision based on what I knew at the time. I just didn’t know enough.
Saying it was a mistake is misleading because we do not know what the outcomes would have been if the shut-down hadn’t occurred. There is a possibility that the predicted death rates could have been reached or exceeded. “If” we avoided that through the shut-down then it’s anything but a mistake. Yet, what we do know is social distancing has been effective in slowing the spread of the virus, as predicted.
QUOTE: It also appears that children are at very low risk, so something short of closing down schools would have been better.
Leaving schools open may not have been a better alternative for those children who would have gotten the virus. As well, exposed children could have been carriers of the virus and spread it to adults in schools systems who in turn could have given it to their families and others they came in contact with. So, it may not have been lethal for the kids but they may have contributed giving it to others for whom it could have been lethal.
Also, impacts from this virus still being discovered. For instance, there’s a new concern of children developing serious inflammatory disease and toxic shock from Covid-19. This is a sentiment echoed as recently as yesterday during a Senate hearing, when a leading expert on infectious disease said…“we don’t know everything about this virus and we better be very careful, particularly when it comes to children. Because, the more we learn, we are seeing things about what this virus can do that we didn’t see from the studies in China or in Europe”.
How would sending infected patients back to nursing homes in NY would have been better?
“Yet, what we do know is social distancing has been effective in slowing the spread of the virus, as predicted.”
Do we? I’ve heard various sides to that. Also, “slowing the spread” was not the stated goal of these policies.
About New York, they sent infected people back to nursing homes, leading to far more deaths.
All indications are that when people have less contact with each other, the virus has less opportunity to spread. Yet, for all those who don’t agree with that, I’d invite them to ignore social distancing guidelines and see what happens. Unfortunately, when “they” do that, they are not the only ones they are putting at risk….that’s the problem.
As for NY, I misread your initial comment and now it makes more sense. I agree, it would have been better if they hadn’t done that. Still, we can’t say with assurance that having the shutdown was a mistake.
According to anonymized phone data, many people in the U.S. are already ignoring social distancing. Some states have started to open up. And then there’s Sweden.
Also, some of us are in “essential” jobs (dumb word), so we’ve been interacting with people all this time.
So … we’ll see what happens.
So far, thank God, predictions have erred on the side of making things sound worse than they are / will be. I hope that continues.
QUOTE: The manager should have offered to do her shopping for her.
That’s exactly what the manager did…twice! She refused, saying that she wanted to buy to private items. Yet, what’s so private that it wouldn’t be seen by others in her cart and/or by the cashier?
Perhaps she intended to buy condoms or tampons via self-checkout.
But I think that she was just looking for trouble.
It’s not as if self-check out is private. There is store video surveillance and other patrons can see her with her private items.
That said, I agree…it seems she was looking for trouble….even questioning the clerk why he was “so happy”…sheesh!