I always argued against a national shutdown, and I think Kemp might have been smart to act a little sooner, particularly for the Metro area. I read the statement from the governor of Montana and I appreciate the caution mixed with sense. I agree with the president that there are places that can and should begin to reopen because they were not so badly hit (for whatever reason). I think governors should consider having conversations with city leaders to test the idea of restarting economies based on the availability of treatment facilities to population.
I think schools could reopen in the fall--especially if the-powers-that-be provide smaller classes to encourage continued physical space. Smaller classes would also allow teachers to differentiate instruction and meet each student's needs.
Churches could probably reopen if they remind people that the personal bubble is still important. churches with chairs instead of pews could space them out a bit. Restaurants could reduce seating capacity for a while, but reopen dining rooms. Large events (concerts, sports, and festivals) should probably be on hold for a while.
I do know that the current all-or-nothing mentality is doing an awful lot of damage to the economy of small businesses. I also think that law-enforcement should not hand out tickets for violating the 6-foot recommendation (as is happening in some places). A reminder is sufficient; everyone knows what's going on. If people insist on congregating, they will suffer the consequences. At some point, personal responsibility has to be at play.
I would put out there that most of us aren't angry that the models were so horrifically wrong, but that our state governors are STILL relying on them. Here in Idaho we have 1650 cases, 49 deaths, yet our whole state is shut down for another two weeks. We have a population of 1.8 million people.
I would be curious as to your take on if the models had been correct, do you believe there is a constitutional basis to deprive us our right to work, our right to gather, our right to protest? If our rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness can be denied because of a possible pandemic, then they really were never rights, were they? In the words of Captain Barbossa, "they are more like...guidelines.
I think they can and could if people don't start making a fuss that this approach was a horrible, horrible overreach.... Fear is a very powerful tool in the political leaders' hands.
Except that unless a virus can be 100% eradicated, it can always come back. And, we know there is no way to eradicate a virus worldwide. His question is very valid, in my opinion.
I always argued against a national shutdown, and I think Kemp might have been smart to act a little sooner, particularly for the Metro area. I read the statement from the governor of Montana and I appreciate the caution mixed with sense. I agree with the president that there are places that can and should begin to reopen because they were not so badly hit (for whatever reason). I think governors should consider having conversations with city leaders to test the idea of restarting economies based on the availability of treatment facilities to population.
I think schools could reopen in the fall--especially if the-powers-that-be provide smaller classes to encourage continued physical space. Smaller classes would also allow teachers to differentiate instruction and meet each student's needs.
Churches could probably reopen if they remind people that the personal bubble is still important. churches with chairs instead of pews could space them out a bit. Restaurants could reduce seating capacity for a while, but reopen dining rooms. Large events (concerts, sports, and festivals) should probably be on hold for a while.
I do know that the current all-or-nothing mentality is doing an awful lot of damage to the economy of small businesses. I also think that law-enforcement should not hand out tickets for violating the 6-foot recommendation (as is happening in some places). A reminder is sufficient; everyone knows what's going on. If people insist on congregating, they will suffer the consequences. At some point, personal responsibility has to be at play.
Sorry but we are already doing the what if's with the whole model tracking!
To me Gov Kemp was to cautions and waited to long before acting and leading.He has made a number of poor political decisions.
First, you need to learn the difference between to, and too, next and more to the point, Erick covered your complaint in the original post.
Erick,
I would put out there that most of us aren't angry that the models were so horrifically wrong, but that our state governors are STILL relying on them. Here in Idaho we have 1650 cases, 49 deaths, yet our whole state is shut down for another two weeks. We have a population of 1.8 million people.
I would be curious as to your take on if the models had been correct, do you believe there is a constitutional basis to deprive us our right to work, our right to gather, our right to protest? If our rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness can be denied because of a possible pandemic, then they really were never rights, were they? In the words of Captain Barbossa, "they are more like...guidelines.
Thanks for helping keep me informed and sane.
I think everyone should take a moment to listen to calm reason as Mr. Erickson presents. Common sense is a good thing for all.
So what happens if it comes back every year and there is no vaccine do we shut down the country every time?
I don’t think we will ever shut down the country again.
I think they can and could if people don't start making a fuss that this approach was a horrible, horrible overreach.... Fear is a very powerful tool in the political leaders' hands.
Sorry but there is no way to track 'what if'.
Except that unless a virus can be 100% eradicated, it can always come back. And, we know there is no way to eradicate a virus worldwide. His question is very valid, in my opinion.
That was very interesting thanks for the insight