The Coronavirus Thread

[Tero]

Viruses on pollution particles travel for miles:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -pollution

[JimC]

If that's the case, then it's handy that reduced vehicle traffic has meant less particulate pollution...

[Tero]

Though you can get infected from a very small number viruses, I'm not sure the distance argument means a whole lot. A person or a duck dispersing viruses in all directions would not be all that dangerous 50m away. You would be very unlucky to be hit by viruses at that distance. There must be some math for number of viruses per square meter at that distance.

[JimC]

Probably the inverse square law...

[pErvinalia]

Bottom line is we've known for yonks there could be a major pandemic, but being stupid ground apes we ignored it and figured everything would be OK. We're not like we were back in 1918, right? We got TVs and shit. We're above all that nonsense, masters of our domain, God's Own Creatures, the old rules don't apply because this is the New Normal.

We're thick as pigshit, basically.

How would libertarians handle this?

[NineBerry]

Bottom line is we've known for yonks there could be a major pandemic, but being stupid ground apes we ignored it and figured everything would be OK. We're not like we were back in 1918, right? We got TVs and shit. We're above all that nonsense, masters of our domain, God's Own Creatures, the old rules don't apply because this is the New Normal.

We're thick as pigshit, basically.

How would libertarians handle this?

Shoot everyone that attempts to come closer than 20 metres.

[Tero]

Bottom line is we've known for yonks there could be a major pandemic, but being stupid ground apes we ignored it and figured everything would be OK. We're not like we were back in 1918, right? We got TVs and shit. We're above all that nonsense, masters of our domain, God's Own Creatures, the old rules don't apply because this is the New Normal.

We're thick as pigshit, basically.

How would libertarians handle this?

Shoot everyone that attempts to come closer than 20 metres.

But if it's the Amazon guy bringing your pork and beans to your bunker?

[laklak]

Depends on how big the "L" is. Some of them want to fly a 747 without a license and strip mine coal. But a rational one understands the need to prepare for what is, historically, inevitable. That level of planning and preparation is a legitimate responsibility of national government, it makes perfect sense to deal with national or international emergencies from a federal perspective. Any other response would be stupid. There's a lot of different shit that falls into the same category. Federal governments are unfortunate necessities.

[pErvinalia]

What about lockdown? Seems pretty anti-libertarian.

[Brian Peacock]

It's pointless to point the finger and blame someone or something for the pandemic - it's a pandemic. Pointing the finger and blaming someone or something for the response to the pandemic though - well, that's legitimate because the first priority of those with the power to act in that regard should be to protect the citizenry. Germany went into lockdown when it had less than 20 fatalities. Systems of testing and tracing and healthcare provision have limited the spread and effects of the virus in Germany, and now the kids are hopefully getting ready to start going back to school. It seems to me the the US doesn't have the systems or the political infrastructure to do something like that at the Federal level - and at the state level it's patchy at best. By contrast the UK has similar provisions and systems to Germany, but in our case the government chose not to act until the virus had taken hold in the population, because.... reasons, which made it a question of political will rather than capacity or infrastructure. In both the UK and the US the initial response from government was to hastily put in place measures which secured the profits of the asset-rich before they thought about funding healthcare systems or taking community-based measures. Again, this was a matter of political will. All the of 'this' lot against 'that' lot is an irrelevance unless, that is, you're only looking at this in political terms - in terms of how you can come out of this looking better than the other lot and, perhaps, even benefiting from the situation electorally.

[Seabass]

Bottom line is we've known for yonks there could be a major pandemic, but being stupid ground apes we ignored it and figured everything would be OK. We're not like we were back in 1918, right? We got TVs and shit. We're above all that nonsense, masters of our domain, God's Own Creatures, the old rules don't apply because this is the New Normal.

We're thick as pigshit, basically.

How would libertarians handle this?

Shoot everyone that attempts to come closer than 20 metres.

But if it's the Amazon guy bringing your pork and beans to your bunker?

You just have to find the inner strength necessary to resist shooting the delivery bot.

[Seabass]

It's pointless to point the finger and blame someone or something for the pandemic - it's a pandemic. Pointing the finger and blaming someone or something for the response to the pandemic though - well, that's legitimate because the first priority of those with the power to act in that regard should be to protect the citizenry. Germany went into lockdown when it had less than 20 fatalities. Systems of testing and tracing and healthcare provision have limited the spread and effects of the virus in Germany, and now the kids are hopefully getting ready to start going back to school. It seems to me the the US doesn't have the systems or the political infrastructure to do something like that at the Federal level - and at the state level it's patchy at best. By contrast the UK has similar provisions and systems to Germany, but in our case the government chose not to act until the virus had taken hold in the population, because.... reasons, which made it a question of political will rather than capacity or infrastructure. In both the UK and the US the initial response from government was to hastily put in place measures which secured the profits of the asset-rich before they thought about funding healthcare systems or taking community-based measures. Again, this was a matter of political will. All the of 'this' lot against 'that' lot is an irrelevance unless, that is, you're only looking at this in political terms - in terms of how you can come out of this looking better than the other lot and, perhaps, even benefiting from the situation electorally.

It's not about blame, Brian. It's about figuring out what works and what doesn't so that in the future we can do better. I would suggest that a political party whose raison d'etre is to "dismantle the administrative state" and "shrink government down small enough to drown it in a bathtub" probably isn't going give you the kind of government that can handle global pandemics effectively.

[laklak]

What about lockdown? Seems pretty anti-libertarian.

It is, and that's why people are chafing against it. It's anti-Murikan by God! But shit happens. The needs of the many and all that - sometimes it's true. Lots of times it's not, but this one is. I don't like it, but it's necessary because ground apes can't follow simple, logical instructions voluntarily.

[JimC]

A rational libertarian!

[laklak]

We're very rational. The best rational. We were doing rational before anybody.