Trump considers reopening the economy over health experts objections

[mommyoffive]

Anyone know what he is going to do?  I am more confused than ever reading this. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-considers-reopening-economy-over-health-experts-objections/ar-BB11Byry?ocid=spartandhp

[Pen]

I think it would be a good idea to make calls to White House and to sign the petition in the link below (toward bottom of the article with a green box toward right)  if you want things to be closed.

No doubt corporate America is calling.

 Are we?

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56

 

[prairiewindmomma]

It seems all of the evening news pundits are all trying to make sense of his statements also.

And anything else I would say about that would be political.

Personally, as our local hospitals are full and are out of PPE entirely to the point and everything is shut down....but we aren’t even going to peak for 3-4 weeks at minimum...I just can’t even. 

[Corraleno]

The "one week" alluded to in the bolded comment, and Trump's tweet regarding the "15 day period," refer to the initial two week period of restrictions that ends on March 30th. In his tweet he indicated that by March 30th he will decide "which way we want to go" — meaning whether to stick with the current restrictions or allow businesses to reopen and people to go back to work.  From WaPo:

 Though restrictions on restaurants and other business have been set by state governments, the president could influence practices if he changed the federal government’s guidelines about social distancing and business closures.

The push for Trump to do so has come from broad swaths of his political coalition, from prominent economists and media figures to key lawmakers in the Senate and the House.

The Wall Street Journal’s influential editorial board published an editorial late last week calling on the administration, as well as governors, to rethink their coronavirus mitigation strategies. “No society can safeguard public health for long at the cost of its overall economic health,” the board wrote.

Conservative economists Stephen Moore and Art Laffer have been lobbying the White House for more than a week to strongly consider scaling back the recommendation that restaurants, stores and other gathering spots be closed, although exactly what that would entail remains unclear.

Financial titans, including former Goldman Sachs chief executive Lloyd Blankfein, and conservative media figures also have embraced the idea.

“In one week we need to be heading back to work, school, stores, restaurants and churches with new protocols in place,” Laura Ingraham, a conservative commentator whose show on Fox News Channel the president is known to watch regularly, tweeted Monday.

Conservatives close to Trump and numerous administration officials have been circulating an article by Richard A. Epstein of the Hoover Institution, titled “Coronavirus Perspective,” that plays down the extent of the spread and the threat. The article, published last week, had predicted that deaths would peak at 500, the milestone surpassed Monday.

 

[Pen]

It may or may not help, but make voices heard. It does seem to have made a difference locally from our Governor planning to keep things open to giving a Stay Home order.  

I have sent more messages by phone or email or contact us or petitions forms in the past few weeks than in my whole past life before that put together. 

I think it does make a difference.  

[KungFuPanda]

Where's my boyfriend?  They've shoved Dr. Fauci in a closet somewhere.  I just know it!  

And Texas, WTH with your Lieutenant Governor?????? 

Edited March 24, 2020 by KungFuPanda

[Sneezyone]

He can't order states to lift their emergency declarations. It's all blue and bluster with no actual function or effect.

[Corraleno]

7 minutes ago, KungFuPanda said:

Where's my boyfriend?  They've shoved Dr. Fauci in a closet somewhere.  I just know it!  

And Texas, WTH with your Lieutenant Governor?????? 

Did you know that Fauci is 79 years old??? I was stunned, I would have thought he was in his early 60s. The fact that despite being in the highest possible risk group, he is continuing to work 18-20 hour days and travel and be exposed to so many people makes him an even bigger superhero in my mind. That guy should get every medal the president and congress can bestow on a citizen. 

[KungFuPanda]

Just now, Corraleno said:

Did you know that Fauci is 79 years old??? I was stunned, I would have thought he was in his early 60s. The fact that despite being in the highest possible risk group, he is continuing to work 18-20 hour days and travel and be exposed to so many people makes him an even bigger superhero in my mind. That guy should get every medal the president and congress can bestow on a citizen. 

I can read between the lines here.  Back off!  He's MINE.  I called dibs.

[Pawz4me]

6 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

He can't order states to lift their emergency declarations. It's all blue and bluster with no actual function or effect.

Yep. He can posture all he wants, but the governors are the ones who will decide when things start to re-open.

[Carrie12345]

I have not been able to wrap my mind around many of the things said.  All of the talk about some areas having few cases and not “needing” restrictions... Restrictions are what prevent/minimize the spread.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Pawz4me said:

Yep. He can posture all he wants, but the governors are the ones who will decide when things start to re-open.

Thank god my governor is not a blithering idiot who doesn’t understand germ transmission. 🙄

[Ausmumof3]

11 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

That’s not a fair assessment, and fairly uncharitable in assumptions about everyone involved 😞.  The discussion nationally isn’t about not understanding how or why it spreads, but balancing how much damage to allow and to who and where and by what cause.  
 

This is a federalist system, something that many people have bemoaned with the unequal state rollout of restrictions.  But that also means each state can decide when and how much to lift with their own national guard and health and human services departments.  The feds can give information and issue guidance to assist with that state level decision making, and a phased return to work to begin in 2-4 weeks, with cases peaking here through the end of March and beginning of April, makes sense economically.  Especially if the phase return recommendation is for younger workers first, many of whom are hit particularly hard by their lack of assets and job benefits compared with older employees.

Just speaking of return dates, even if it is several weeks out, would be a good stabilizing force to Wall Street, among other things.  And some level of guidance or certainty in terms of an end to the pain DOES matter for public perception, which is precisely what the president is supposed to guide.

Trump being optimistic calming with his interpretation of what he is being told and his team of experts being cautious and projecting out worst case scenarios with the data is exactly the balance you actually want them to strike. The states then have a choice, based on their own industry, medical resources, constituent feedback, etc, to choose how they wish to implement that.  Letting the public see the contrast in outcomes from the implementation differences among the states also creates a feedback loop that gives more information up the chain about where to help or guide, like in the case of the states not shutting things down fast enough and seeing spikes in the spring break population, etc.

World leaders across the spectrum from democratic to authoritarian are struggling with what is the right response to this to mitigate harm, and for how long to utilize each phase.  Trump is not being particularly cavalier about it and neither are many of the governors and legislatures involved.  Some of the people in Congress need to stand account for their naked ambition or carelessness with this (and the legislation dealing with it) but I don’t think it really helps to assume motive or idiocy in the face of a crisis that is not just health, but involves years of economic fallout for millions of people as well. Both matter, and the longer this goes on the more assurance and trajectory projections people need from the top.  I just wouldn’t assume that the White House saying things should be rolling again, carefully and selectively, in a few weeks, means they’re disregarding health and safety.  Every world leader is stuck trying to make the same calculations for their populations right now, and deciding how deeply and how long to err toward the side of complete suppression is tricky when there are negative consequences involved in that, especially for those most vulnerable.

This is what I thought it was about.  Reassuring the markets.  I prefer honestly but we aren’t going to get that.

[Lady Florida.]

9 hours ago, Corraleno said:

Did you know that Fauci is 79 years old??? I was stunned, I would have thought he was in his early 60s. 

I figured he had to be up there in age because he's served under 5 presidents.

[Pen]

4 hours ago, Arctic Mama said:

That’s not a fair assessment, and fairly uncharitable in assumptions about everyone involved 😞.  The discussion nationally isn’t about not understanding how or why it spreads, but balancing how much damage to allow and to who and where and by what cause.  
 

This is a federalist system, something that many people have bemoaned with the unequal state rollout of restrictions.  But that also means each state can decide when and how much to lift with their own national guard and health and human services departments.  The feds can give information and issue guidance to assist with that state level decision making, and a phased return to work to begin in 2-4 weeks, with cases peaking here through the end of March and beginning of April, makes sense economically.  Especially if the phase return recommendation is for younger workers first, many of whom are hit particularly hard by their lack of assets and job benefits compared with older employees.

Just speaking of return dates, even if it is several weeks out, would be a good stabilizing force to Wall Street, among other things.  And some level of guidance or certainty in terms of an end to the pain DOES matter for public perception, which is precisely what the president is supposed to guide.

Trump being optimistic calming with his interpretation of what he is being told and his team of experts being cautious and projecting out worst case scenarios with the data is exactly the balance you actually want them to strike. The states then have a choice, based on their own industry, medical resources, constituent feedback, etc, to choose how they wish to implement that.  Letting the public see the contrast in outcomes from the implementation differences among the states also creates a feedback loop that gives more information up the chain about where to help or guide, like in the case of the states not shutting things down fast enough and seeing spikes in the spring break population, etc.

World leaders across the spectrum from democratic to authoritarian are struggling with what is the right response to this to mitigate harm, and for how long to utilize each phase.  Trump is not being particularly cavalier about it and neither are many of the governors and legislatures involved.  Some of the people in Congress need to stand account for their naked ambition or carelessness with this (and the legislation dealing with it) but I don’t think it really helps to assume motive or idiocy in the face of a crisis that is not just health, but involves years of economic fallout for millions of people as well. Both matter, and the longer this goes on the more assurance and trajectory projections people need from the top.  I just wouldn’t assume that the White House saying things should be rolling again, carefully and selectively, in a few weeks, means they’re disregarding health and safety.  Every world leader is stuck trying to make the same calculations for their populations right now, and deciding how deeply and how long to err toward the side of complete suppression is tricky when there are negative consequences involved in that, especially for those most vulnerable.

 

I agree with you.

 

In addition, I regard a lot of what Trump says as similar to trial balloons, or like blind letters that countries sometimes let slip to other countries to gauge reactions.

 I take it as an indication that he’s now in something like an unofficial public comments period as he decides what to do.  He’s heard from corporate, business side quite a lot, if one has different opinions it is a chance to voice them during the decision making period. 

(Just my personal interpretation.)

Also, and I heard Trump say this at some point, it is how he negotiates. Ask nicely for people to distance, and they don’t. Very possibly, take opposite stance, and a larger number will push for the needed distancing themselves, or possibly be more ready to accept a tighter approach. 

(And I guess a lot of people are voicing opinions, the phone comments line has been with busy signal.) 

Edited March 24, 2020 by Pen

[prairiewindmomma]

I can’t believe the markets are dumb enough to believe this is just going to go away or that all will be well if we end social distancing 8 days from now.

So, his purpose in saying this has to be to offer hope to the service industry workers who just got laid off.

The rest of my comments would all be political...lots of yelling, the occasional curse word, and a sincere hope that he kicks off the end of social distancing in 8 days with a large party at Mar-A-Lago.

Fortunately, this decision is largely in the hands of governors.

[DoraBora]

 

51 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

I can’t believe the markets are dumb enough to believe this is just going to go away or that all will be well if we end social distancing 8 days from now.

So, his purpose in saying this has to be to offer hope to the service industry workers who just got laid off.

The rest of my comments would all be political...lots of yelling, the occasional curse word, and a sincere hope that he kicks off the end of social distancing in 8 days with a large party at Mar-A-Lago.

Fortunately, this decision is largely in the hands of governors.

How is this not political?

Here is what President Trump said yesterday (and what I am guessing people here are discussing): 

"Our country was not built to be shut down," the President warned on Monday. "We are going to be opening up our country for business because our country was meant to be open."

"We are going to get it all going again very soon," he said, without setting a timeline -- though he previously called for rethinking the White House's guidance on social distancing next week.

 

Nothing specific.  Hopeful, but open-ended. 

 

I copy/pasted that quote from CNN.  Notice the word "warned" (emphasis mine).  There are any number of verbs the writer could have used to make Mr. Trump's words seem less ominous.

 

Edited March 24, 2020 by DoraBora

[Pen]

6 hours ago, Quill said:

Thank god my governor is not a blithering idiot who doesn’t understand germ transmission. 🙄

 

I am glad that your Governor is one that gets it.  Mine didn’t much seem to get it, only seemed to make restrictions because of lots of pressure.  (Still thinks she is opening schools bacK up to normal in late April afaik, so no home learning plans are happening in my area)....  

 I don’t agree with the probable backhand jibe at certain other government officials in all cases. Some I expect are quite intelligent and have ... other approaches.  

Edited March 24, 2020 by Pen

[Pen]

46 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

I can’t believe the markets are dumb enough to believe this is just going to go away or that all will be well if we end social distancing 8 days from now.

So, his purpose in saying this has to be to offer hope to the service industry workers who just got laid off.

 

Possibly. 

And there is no commitment to end social distancing or open up international travel etc in 8 days. 

I am calling, writing etc.

Same as I did with OSAA, Kate Brown, etc.

[Corraleno]

29 minutes ago, DoraBora said:

 

"Our country was not built to be shut down," the President warned on Monday. "We are going to be opening up our country for business because our country was meant to be open."

"We are going to get it all going again very soon," he said, without setting a timeline -- though he previously called for rethinking the White House's guidance on social distancing next week.

 

Nothing specific.  Hopeful, but open-ended.

 

He has explicitly said he wants restrictions lifted by April 12th, insisting that people will continue voluntary social distancing and will protect the elderly. 

[prairiewindmomma]

29 minutes ago, DoraBora said:

 

How is this not political?

 

 

Leaders should lead out first.  If he believes that it is safe to start up the economy again, then he should lead out the effort.

Frankly, I find it appalling that we ask health care workers to work, but we don't provide safety equipment to them.  Governors call on the federal government for help, to systems that were designed to help in such a crisis, and it isn't supplied.  (Our state asked for ventilators, and received NONE, and only 10% of the masks it asked for from the strategic reserve.)  

Aside from any personal feelings about our current head of state, it is the lack of functionality in our current system that is contributing to the problem.  I frankly am deeply upset with most leaders right now, from both sides of the aisle. 

 

[73349]

[boring government discussion]

Edited October 2, 2020 by Carolina Wren

[ktgrok]

What confuses and honestly, angers me, is them floating the idea in public that it would be safe to go back to work/restaurants/church with "new guidelines" in place. What does that mean? With a disease that spreads even without symptoms, that lives on surfaces for days, how on earth can you have guidelines that would allow say, a pub to be open to crowds, and be safe? 

They are reinforcing the message (wrongly) that as long as someone doesn't look sick, they are safe to be around. That as long as someone is not a senior citizen, they are not at risk. That as long as you wash your hands every so often, you won't get it. NONE of which is remotely true. 

That's the dangerous part. 

[ktgrok]

Just now, kdsuomi said:

Oh my goodness, the mischaracterization that occurs here. He can't force businesses to open but can make recommendations. It will still be a state by state decision. Unfortunately, my state is much more open to an authoritarian government and will likely remain closed for months. Instead of an economy, the government will just start handing out "free" money and those who economically survive will be taxed to death later. Hyperbolic? Maybe. Still basically what will happen in my state? Pretty likely. 

"Taxed to death" is better than actually dead. 

[Corraleno]

No one expects a complete shut down to last for months and months. But it is completely nuts to tell everyone to go back to business as usual in two weeks, when restrictions have barely had time to take effect, new cases are still increasing exponentially, and hospitals lack the basic equipment and resources to handle the cases they have now, let alone a few weeks from now. He is proposing to remove restrictions while the curve is not only not flattening, it's still going straight up. These kinds of decisions should be based on epidemiological data, not the Dow Jones average.

[DoraBora]

48 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

He has explicitly said he wants restrictions lifted by April 12th, insisting that people will continue voluntary social distancing and will protect the elderly. 

... but wanting something isn't the same thing as ordering it.  He wants that.  He is "considering" that.  It doesn't mean he will order the country open.  In the ABC interview, he said it's his opinion that we have to get people back to work. 

“I would love to have the country opened up and rearing to go by Easter,” Trump said during a Fox News interview.

(You know, *I* would love to have the country opened up by Easter, too.  I want a lot of things.  Doesn't mean I will act to make them happen in my little corner of the world, regardless of the potential harm it might do to others.)

Edited March 24, 2020 by DoraBora

[DoraBora]

1 minute ago, square_25 said:

Well, the country isn't closed, so I don't know what he means, really. 

True that.  It sort of feels like it is, in my county and city, anyway.

[8filltheheart]

What I cannot get past is we have disaster response teams and supposed homeland security task forces at both the state and federal levels who had months warning that this virus existed. Why all the scrambling now? Why were medical supplies/gear not ordered/sanctioned when numbers in Wuhan went from 42 to over 1000 in a couple of days? (I ordered powdered milk and eggs at that pt bc I suspected it would be heading our way and I wanted emergency style rations.) Goodness, if I thought to do that for my family, what the heck were professionslly trained emergency-focused task forces doing to prepare?

We are a country that is teasing at a shutdown with some complying, some not. We were caught with obviously zero forethought toward equipping our medical personnel for what was coming. The lack of competent leadership abounds at all levels across the entire country at every level.

[Amira]

Testing is what will allow people to return to work. Not only to know where cases are happening now, but especially to know who has already had it and can safely be out in public without risking their own or others’ health.  

And yes, people will die if the economy continues to fall apart.  But it’s the people who were already living on the edge who will be harmed most, and I’m not seeing much from certain lawmakers that is targeted at those people. Honestly, I don’t want to save the fragile economy we’ve been working with, one that collapses when people stay home for a week and that focuses on benefitting the most privileged.  I hope we build a better economy, one that allows people to take sick leave and spend more time with the people they love and get paid a decent wage, in acknowledgment of the fact that it is those people who are actually the ones keeping the US alive right now.

Edited March 24, 2020 by Amira

[Carrie12345]

7 minutes ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

What I cannot get past is we have disaster response teams and supposed homeland security task forces at both the state and federal levels who had months warning that this virus existed. Why all the scrambling now? Why were medical supplies/gear not ordered/sanctioned when numbers in Wuhan went from 42 to over 1000 in a couple of days? (I ordered powdered milk and eggs at that pt bc I suspected it would be heading our way and I wanted emergency style rations.) Goodness, if I thought to do that for my family, what the heck were professionslly trained emergency-focused task forces doing to prepare?

We are a country that is teasing at a shutdown with some complying, some not. We were caught with obviously zero forethought toward equipping our medical personnel for what was coming. The lack of competent leadership abounds at all levels across the entire country at every level.

And it makes me SO ANGRY! I am not any sort of special genius; I’ve only done some FEMA self-paced, distance learning. Enough to know how things are “supposed to” go. Then again, I’ve seen so many small scale things go sideways that I knew from the beginning that this wasn’t going to go smoothly.

My main issue with different standards for different areas is that we are ALL dependent on one another. We rejected small and local for big and national. If our areas were more independent, we could get by. If we open even more areas up for spread, who’s left standing in the end???

[Spy Car]

Insane response.

We all need to avoid going out as much as possible--shelter at home--unless we are vital to keeping food, medicine, other critical supplies in the supply chain, are involved in maintaining critical infrastructure, or are a first responder or medical professional.

The hit to the economy will be much smaller in the long run if we slow transmission in the short run.

 Bill

[Spy Car]

Just now, square_25 said:

Right. Exactly. I feel like people aren't appreciating this fact enough. If we stay with the sluggish response, it WILL be a year before things get back to normal. And not because anyone wills it that way. 

Right. I think if we are loose about this that we will deal with a growing crisis and with death and economic devastation until there is a vaccine.

We need society to shut down. Folks need to stay home unless they are involved in essential work. We support the heroic people who are exposing themselves by not compounding social contacts.

It seems like we could drastically slow the spread of this virus if we listen to the experts. Concerns about the short term economic hits are understandable, but it will be a much smaller cost than if we fail to shut down.

Bill

 

[QueenCat]

16 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

He can't order states to lift their emergency declarations. It's all blue and bluster with no actual function or effect.

 

Exactly. Hopefully, enough of our governors are intelligent enough to follow WHO and CDC advice, rather than other advice.

[Corraleno]

42 minutes ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

What I cannot get past is we have disaster response teams and supposed homeland security task forces at both the state and federal levels who had months warning that this virus existed. Why all the scrambling now? Why were medical supplies/gear not ordered/sanctioned when numbers in Wuhan went from 42 to over 1000 in a couple of days?

And before anyone had even heard of Covid-19, the administration had a report on the results of an eight-month simulation run by Health and Human Services that concluded the government's capacity to respond to a major pandemic was disorganized, underfunded, and woefully unprepared for exactly the sort of scenario we ended up with. One of the key conclusions in the report was that "The current medical countermeasure supply chain and production capacity cannot meet the demands imposed by nations during a global influenza pandemic."  That report was delivered in October 2019. One would think that the report alone would raise red flags and spur people into action, and that hearing about Covid-19 mere weeks after reading this report would send people into overdrive trying to make sure the country was adequately prepared. Instead they did nothing, except falsely assure the population that this was no big deal and we were well prepared to deal with it, and cases "would be zero soon." 

Mind boggling.

Edited March 24, 2020 by Corraleno

[maize]

Yes. Shut down everything that can be shut down and test everyone we can--not only tests for active infection; we're going to need antibody testing to catch people whose infections weren't caught when active so we know who has had the illness and built up some immunity. Those people will be some of our best resources in the months ahead.

[8filltheheart]

36 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

And before anyone had even heard of Covid-19, the administration had a report on the results of an eight-month simulation run by Health and Human Service that concluded the federal government was disorganized, underfunded, and woefully unprepared to fight exactly the sort of pandemic we ended up with. One of the key conclusions in the report was that "The current medical countermeasure supply chain and production capacity cannot meet the demands imposed by nations during a global influenza pandemic."  That report was delivered in October 2019. One would think that the report alone would raise red flags and spur people into action, and that hearing about Covid-19 mere weeks after reading this report would send people into overdrive trying to make sure the country was adequately prepared. Instead they did nothing, except falsely assure the population that this was no big deal and we were well prepared to deal with it, and cases "would be zero soon." 

Mind boggling.

Part of the problem? Yes. Solely responsible? I dont accept this is any single branch of the entire country's fault. I think it was boggled there, but equally on multiple other levels, including state, as well. We were unprepared. Period. Just plain ridiculous

The entire preparedness response reminds me of the local run on.TP. 

[Sneezyone]

1 minute ago, square_25 said:

Although he can probably punish states that don't... 

 

No more than they're already being punished through neglect.

[8filltheheart]

13 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I don't think this is supposed to be a state-level issue. Not traditionally. It is now, because there's no choice, but I don't think governors expected it. 

They probably should have. But people do keep operating as if everything is functioning normally for far too long. I certainly did. 

NY doesnt have an office.of emergency management? NYC doesnt? Hospitals dont?  Even the nursing home where my dd works does.  States do business with companies. They could have ordered suits/masks, respirators in Jan when China was saying they sidnt have enough. Could have requested increased production. 

[EmseB]

2 minutes ago, square_25 said:

States can't run a deficit. It's harder for them. They also can't compel companies to do what they want. 

I agree that they should have probably assumed the federal government wasn't going to come through and done their best. But traditionally, this is not a state-level issue. 

Huh? This is kind of federalism 101. Many of these things are, in fact, state and local issues and decisions. Governors have to declare emergencies and such to access federal resources, for example.

I'm actually kind of disturbed by the amount of people who think the federal government should or could do so much unilaterally during a time of emergency, especially given our current administration. 

[8filltheheart]

9 minutes ago, square_25 said:

States can't run a deficit. It's harder for them. They also can't compel companies to do what they want. 

I agree that they should have probably assumed the federal government wasn't going to come through and done their best. But traditionally, this is not a state-level issue. 

I feel like states are already doing more than is expected from them. I don't feel like blaming them. The only reason NYS has enough tests is because it's running them in-state. The only reason it's shut down is because of Cuomo. That's ridiculous. 

https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/library/reports/Exec_Sum_FEMA.html

"Primary responsibility for disaster response rests with state and local governments; the federal role supplements that of the states and localities. Currently, when a disaster overwhelms state and local communities, FEMA coordinates the responses of 26 federal agencies......"

[Sneezyone]

Just talked to my Dad, a regular consumer of suspect news, who said he thought this would all be over in a week or so. SHOOT ME NOW. This is why I have to call him every week--to put a check on the Pollyanna-ish crap pouring through his boob tube. No, Dad, the medical crisis won't be at it's zenith for another 2-4 weeks and it will take 6-8 weeks after that for it to begin tapering off. Some states haven't adopted stringent measures (or any at all really) and their cases will have to move through as well.

2 minutes ago, EmseB said:

Huh? This is kind of federalism 101. Many of these things are, in fact, state and local issues and decisions. Governors have to declare emergencies and such to access federal resources, for example.

I'm actually kind of disturbed by the amount of people who think the federal government should or could do so much unilaterally during a time of emergency, especially given our current administration. 

 

Handling interstate matters of commerce and public health, as well as war (which this apparently is), is what they are supposed to do. It is, in fact, their job having preempted individual state regulation of drug therapies, testing, etc.

Edited March 24, 2020 by Sneezyone

[Sneezyone]

Just now, Dotwithaperiod said:

 It’s not just NY. It’s going to happen in so many other states. Louisiana may be the first southern one to go thru the hell NY is experiencing. 

It’s nothing short of insanity to have individual states bidding against each other and the feds for medical supplies. 

Do we deny states aid in disasters such as earthquakes and hurricanes? Do we blame their local gov’ts while the people suffer? Yep, that’s right. Some of them do exactly that. 

 

 

Yep, blame is spread far and wide. Sometimes it's deserved, sometimes it's not. The people/residents still shouldn't be on the receiving end of governmental malice.

[Sneezyone]

3 minutes ago, 8FillTheHeart said:

https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/library/reports/Exec_Sum_FEMA.html

"Primary responsibility for disaster response rests with state and local governments; the federal role supplements that of the states and localities. Currently, when a disaster overwhelms state and local communities, FEMA coordinates the responses of 26 federal agencies......"

 

This isn't a localized, natural disaster. Big difference.

[Bootsie]

The problem appears to be that hot spots pop up and it is difficult to predict where those hot spots will be.  One half of the US cases right now are in NY (and many of those in INYC).  The vast majority of the cases in Italy are in small area.  The worst of the outbreak in South Korea was localized.  The bad news is that puts extra stress on hospital resources in those particular areas rather than be evenly spread out across the country.  Having everyone locked down in South Dakota, for example, does little to alleviate the problems in NYC.  

[Corraleno]

FEMA responds to localized disasters caused by things like hurricanes, earthquakes, wildfires, floods, etc. The idea that individual states should be 100% responsible for managing the response to a global pandemic that affects the entire country is absurd — as has been clearly demonstrated in the current situation, where states who wanted to use their own tests were denied, states are being told to buy their own medical equipment and then are being outbid the federal government, etc.

The whole point of the Crimson Contagion exercise was to figure out how to best coordinate response to a global pandemic on a national level. And they found that the biggest issues were the chaos, confusion, and the lack of coordination among the different federal agencies involved, as well as between those federal agencies and the states. Those were precisely the reasons the virtual pandemic in the simulation got so out of control, causing 500K deaths. And now we are watching that play out in real time, with real lives at stake.

[Dicentra]

I check the chart (and other data) here often:

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus#trajectories-since-the-100th-confirmed-case

This shows the trajectories since the 100th confirmed case in each country:

This is with North America highlighted:

When China and Italy were at the number of cases the US has, even they were starting to level off.  If restrictions are lifted, the slope of that US line will just get steeper.  Thoughts?

[Joker]

3 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I would absolutely reject that premise. Half the reason NY has so many cases is that it's running MANY more tests per capita. That's because it has in-state labs that can do so, which most states do not. 

The other half is that it IS, in fact, a hot spot. But I'm sure many, many states are vastly undercounting. 

Yes, my Midwest county only has 12 cases listed but we've had 3 deaths. I'm not sure about the 2 overnight but our first death was community transmission (no travel and no contact with anyone known positive), so we obviously have many more people with this thing but no one can get tested here unless you end up in the hospital.

[Dicentra]

1 minute ago, Arctic Mama said:

Yeah, the low level of testing available to the healthy populous makes these numbers fairly meaningless, they have a very inaccurate denominator and only those sick enough for hospitalization are being tested in many states, including my own.

I wouldn’t read into those charts at all.

Wouldn't that then mean there are even more cases out there that have been tested for?  And the slope is even further away from leveling off?

[Dicentra]

4 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I think we've recently ramped up testing, which means that we're overestimating rate of growth, not underestimating. At least that'd be my guess. 

However, I'm rather worried about the slope anyway. Lots of factors here. 

 

1 minute ago, Arctic Mama said:

Not as a percentage, no.  It skews the data pretty hard when most of your population isn’t sick.  But definitely expect another two weeks or so of those numbers going up, just based on where we are at right now with those currently infected and how long it would take to see their spread.  It’s going to look worse before it looks better.

But it isn't showing percentages, is it?   It isn't a chart showing "cases per x number of people" or anything like that.

Even with recently ramped up testing, wouldn't the numbers still be comparable to other countries?  The chart isn't comparing actual dates, just days since the 100th case was confirmed.  I think it's a fairly decent graphic of how the response to initial cases has affected the number of cases going forward.

But that's just how I read it. 🙂

[8filltheheart]

Cities and states can declare a state of emergency to access funds. It is exactly what San Fran did in Feb. 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/26/health/san-francisco-coronavirus-emergency-declaration/index.html

"The move will, among other things, help the city get reimbursed by state and federal governments for money it spends on preparedness, Mayor London Breed said at a news conference

"This declaration of emergency is all about preparedness," Breed said."

Yes, cities and states are supposed to have disaster management plans. 

Fwiw, I think the federal government is at fault as well. But, no, not solely.