There's no thought police yet in the Netherlands. I assume those assaults on your wife or your daughter don't happen frequently.

Dutch are nice people.

The FAO estimates that as many as 25,000 people lose their lives every day as a result of hunger. That adds up to roughly 9.1 million people who die of starvation each year.

https://www.creditdonkey.com/world-hunger-statistics.html

Fortunately, starvation is not very contagious so we don't have to worry and the economy is unaffected. Hurrah!

An interesting anecdote: Italy has received a shipment of masks and respirators from China, of all places, to help combat the virus.

Chinese doctors are consulting with European doctors. They stamped a face mask factory out of the ground in 11 days and their production is resuming. They are going to save a ton of lives.

Czechoslovakia and Ukraine are closing their borders. After Sunday-Monday midnight, no Czechs are allowed to leave the country and no foreigners that don't have a residence permit are able to come in. Foreigners now coming from 15 countries are quarantined for two weeks. I wonder how many countries will follow the example.

You can't have your cake and eat it too with fake news media on the one hand and journalists being the main source of correct information for a pandemic on the other. All your arguments are, what they call in Dutch a gelegenheidsargument, eg. arguments for expediency to fit a world view that is simply not logically consistent (or as @Maw put it succinctly, stupid).

As usual you’ve cherry picked, and in your efforts to remain blind to the rest of my argument didn’t realize I was speaking theoretically. As a famous American once said, “Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity“.

Now you got me totally confused? What are you implying here?

That it's a measure of EITHER the federal agencies OR local authorities handle the issue? That's nonsense!

Look, a central coordinator is needed when face a threat like a pandemic. Local authorities, workplaces and schools etc. can decide themselves what to do just as an individual can decide what to do. Yet tackling a pandemic simply isn't something ONLY left to the individual and various communities. It is about making a uniform quick response. To get ready for a possible larger outbreak. You ideological issues simply

Perhaps it’s best if you addressed what I said and not what you pretend I’ve implied. A central coordinator is not needed because if it makes one mistake the entire thing collapses.

Because you utterly fail to understand the need for a concentrated effort that is simply necessitated by practical reasons here and is in no way a plot to undermine individual liberty or state/communal independence.

Just as it would be preposterous for every 50 states to create their own armed forces with their own command structures, own logistics systems etc without any unification and coordination, so it is whimsical to think that there wouldn't be synergy and genuine benefits in having a single federal institution like the CDC in preventing disease outbreaks and giving guidelines on what to do.

But I guess common sense doesn't mean a thing when it comes ideological issues, so this discussion is rather futile.

I understand your obsequious desire for a central coordinator, but no I am unconvinced that we need one. Your “common sense” in my opinion is not common sense, but rather one degree or other of servility. But yes this is a purely ideological and we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

Right. So everybody points out your ideas are stupid as fuck but you claim it's because they don't understand you. Or, alternatively, your ideas are indeed stupid or you're incapable of expressing yourself in English.

An interesting anecdote: Italy has received a shipment of masks and respirators from China, of all places, to help combat the virus. — Echarmion

In times of crisis people need to do whatever needs to be done, even if doing it can be a little unsettling. Wasn't it some American leader or politician that said they would be willing to tip their hat top the devil to find out the conditions in hell?

Right. So everybody points out your ideas are stupid as fuck but you claim it's because they don't understand you. Or, alternatively, your ideas are indeed stupid or you're incapable of expressing yourself in English.

Did I claim they don’t understand me? Nope. I said you cherry picked, and in your efforts to remain blind to the rest of my argument didn’t realize I was speaking theoretically. Do I need to dumb it down a little for you?

You always blame someone else. Common tactic by now. I wasn't cherrypicking, I was picking up on your general stance against journalism and the following comments in this thread:

Looking at the response of the Chinese, Iranian and Italian governments give me pause to accepting that claim. I think any citizen who was concerned about his health, given sufficient education, may avoid public gatherings without first being told to do so by some bureaucrat. I think the press, those whose job it is to inform the people, have more responsibility than a government. — NOS4A2

But it is the journalist who informs the people of the facts, or at least should. — NOS4A2

Again, I’m speaking about the press, who are better equipped to relay information about current affairs to a vast audience. — NOS4A2

So if your point now is "well, I'm just talking about a theoretical world" (while complaining about issues in the real world) then you really need to just fuck off and stop complaining about whatever any government is doing because they are actually dealing with facts.

Did I say anything wrong there?

I think journalism and a free press are deeply important, but the problem is you pretend my criticism of fake news in particular is an indictment on journalism in general. So not only do you cherry pick, but you are unable to differentiate between the simplest of concepts.

See I was right Trump has got the virus, he was living it up with Bolsanaro the other day, who was diagnosed yesterday. Off with his head.

Trump can't admit that he needs testing, because it would weaken his machismo. Powerful populist leaders like him and Johnson have to remain invincible alpha males at all times, or they might fall to the level of all those weak marxist and communist leaders over there, on the other side. It's essential for Machiavellian divide and rule.

Off with their heads.

Wonderful irony if he does. He'll get a personal taste of what a hoax virus feels like. And, no, Don, it's not just like the flu. News I just read suggests Ivanka may be infected too.

Well, NOS4A2 no one likes fake news, I think all here will agree to that. What we will not agree about is what news outlets produce this fake news and what is fake or not fake. If our beloved orange leader says the turnout at his inauguration was bigger than Obama's there are scores of people willing to belief this is a report of fact, even if there are photo's to show otherwise. They can easily resort to the 'backup hypthesis that this is another democrat scam. So the question becomes who you believe. There are good arguments to believe one side over the other, but some have opted out of playing the game of 'best argument wins' and just claim that 'who I like better I will support'. This happens on both sides.

But anyway, I do see a coherent position in NOS4A2's analysis. It is actually very coherent. He, (or 'you' NOS4A2, I don't like talking about you as if you are not there, but I am also addressing other so forgive the 'he') holds a libertarian position which is generally not based on the public good but on personal liberty. Libertarians see government infringements as inherently suspect because it harms personal freedom and since we are on the world to be free and not slaves, this is an inherent wrong. That is why arguing from the common good against this position is generally pointless. It holds a different frame of reference.

However NOS4A2 seems to hold to a more strong position. also implying that citizens if left to their own devices are more capable of making informed choices than can governments who take decisions for them. The idea is based on the principle of subsidiarity, decisions at the local level need to be taken locally. The most intimate decisions such as about health are very local. In the end this principle boils down to a minimalist government indeed who's role is no more than safeguarding the individual freedom of choice, because the individual knows best. That is if this individual has full information, hence the important role for journalism and the press. They should present the public with unbiassed information so they can make optimal choices, efficiently allocate goods through the market. So far the position is perfectly coherent.

The only problem is there is a weakness in it and that is that some decisions require collective action and then decisions need to be coordinated. To give an example: when in summer European decide en masse to drive south for holiday, they have to traverse the city of Paris with its congested roads. They can travel around it but it takes longer. When it is very congested though it might be worth your while. Now in NOS4A2's libertarian world with full information the following would happen. Drivers set out and they learn that the roads in paris are severely congested. They know the roads, they know the detours and they all hear it is a mess in Paris and being the economically efficient people they are they take the detour. Lo and behold the traffic in Paris clears but the side roads get terribly clogged. they might by now all calculate and decide to turn back but they end up in just as severe mass because they all follow the same type of reasoning and all have full information.

It is not so difficult to se what good a central traffic authority regulating the flows would do in such a case. Collective action problems, like preventing a pandemic, are problems that are best coordinated on higher levels. This increases legal certainty for the citizens, make sure they do not run into different rules to which they need to adapt in several different regions, the necessary resources can be quickly allocated preventing every minute territory hoarding its supplies for itself and all kinds of other advantages of scale. I do not disagree with the principle of subsidiarity, but I do disagree with the rather absolute veneration for individual rights over collective ones. I simply do not see from whence it follows. If that falls it is easy to see that having a government taking care of collective action problems is a very sound idea.

PS that is exactly why Trump's travel ban is so silly. Next to no case in the US are traceable to Europe, but he misses out on opportunities to cooperate, choosing to harm his people in fact for political gain. If he was serious about travel restriction, as said not itself such a bad idea, restrict inter state travel and indeed keep the outbreaks in states and coordinate action together with state and central government for optimal efficiency... pragmatic policy is not that difficult...

You’ve been sorely missed. Glad to see you back. :up:

I appreciate the fair analysis of my arguments. It’s a rarity around here, it seems.

There is not much I can object to, but a few points which may be cause for discussion.

I do not think the individual knows best, only that he knows what’s best for himself and his own interests. I do not think think this principle precludes collective action. After all, collectives are composed of individuals, and it is in our nature to cooperate with others and engage in common enterprise.

I also think we should be wary of equivocating between a central authority and collective action. This, to me, seems like a contradiction in terms, just by the fact that a vast majority of the collective, of individuals, are not a part of the central authority and left out of any decision making, often to the detriment of their own interests and liberties. My main contention on this point is that individuals can indeed band together to form, say, a traffic agency, but that they can do so without monopolizing their authority. I’m not (yet) a proponent of free market roads, but perhaps a sort of pluralism of authorities would suffice, though I haven’t really given it enough thought of how that might work in practice, so I will concede to your point about traffic.

As for a pandemic, I do not see how a central authority is the only answer to fighting it. Individual actions such as washing hands and staying away from crowds are more than enough to suppress the spread of virus, no state-sanctioned suppression of movement or gatherings are required. The question is whether individuals are informed and responsible enough to perform these actions, and of that we can almost be sure that they are not.

But I think the pandemic will reveal a lot in regards to the central authority approach to combatting it. The CCP, one of the most powerful central authorities in world history, still bungled their efforts and suppressed the rights of countless millions in order to do so. Italy’s world-renowned government healthcare system is overwhelmed, and the people are on lockdown. The heavy-handed approach to mitigation may be effective, but at what cost and at whose expense?

Again, thanks for the fair shake.

Below are some links to information about the Coronavirus ...as well as some of the craziness that are doing while it is going on:


Coronavirus Quarantine Survivor Keeps Coughing on TV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5PXh4U8CJs

Tennessee parents take extreme measures over novel coronavirus
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOPvuGZO_Fs

Guy suggests giving everyone coronavirus to spare the economy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEU-Bk0gMi4

Operations Dashboard for Coronavirus COVID-19 Cases WorldWide
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

Journalist goes undercover at wet markets where the Coronavirus started | 60 Minutes Australia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7nZ4mw4mXw

Doctor Fact-Checks Media On Coronavirus
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CRxyHU9Oxo&t

Full Fauci: For Coronavirus And Crowds, 'If You're A Vulnerable Person, Take It Seriously'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvhvZS1rUCQ

Infectious disease epidemiologist answers questions about coronavirus COVID-19
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwuNglv8PLA

Thanks for the links!

See I was right Trump has got the virus, he was living it up with Bolsanaro the other day, who was diagnosed yesterday. Off with his head.

Updated: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro Denies Reports He Tested Positive For Coronavirus After Trump Meeting

Guess Trump was right. Godspeed, EU.

The only problem is there is a weakness in it and that is that some decisions require collective action and then decisions need to be coordinated. — Tobias

Covid-19, SARS, MERS, Swineflu, Birdflu, all originated from animals (many wild ones) and the zoonosis seems to be something quite ordinary now days. Animals that otherwise wouldn't be in contact with humans is the reason for these new outbreaks and the reason issue why this thing has to be handled with international cooperation. Awareness and information ought to change habits.

I bet, if for some reason, black rats would be a local traditional delicacy in Arizona, you would get the occasional bubonic plague epidemic in the US. Now it's just single cases then and now. And how much people wash their hands in Minnesota wouldn't simply wouldn't be the answer.

Just now Trump declared a national emergency in the US. He also mentioned a variety of public-private partnerships to tackle mitigation, which contrast with the approaches taken by the rest of the world. It will be interesting to compare the effectiveness of each approach once the pandemic is over.

Two birds, one stone.

Better late than never, but we're going to see Italy-level pain here shortly. The testing fiasco will go down in history as one of the great American blunders. So will Trump's tone-deaf promises early on:

""And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done.""
Trump, Feb 26

That's the day Trump lost the election.

Just now Trump declared a national emergency in the US. — NOS4A2

Lol.

Says the guy who was just moments ago was so against federal coordinated responses (because they could go wrong) and was to leave it to local authorities and individuals. :mask:

Corona sex

As a species, we're doomed.

Did I say I was for it? Because I cannot see where I did. Perhaps you just made it up.

Better late than never, but we're going to see Italy-level pain here shortly. The testing fiasco will go down in history as one of the great American blunders. So will Trump's tone-deaf promises early on:

That’s quite false, according to Tony Fauci. The system didn’t allow for mass testing, he said, that we needed to include the private sphere, which they just announced during his most recent press conference. The administration fixed the testing problem.

You can see it at the 39 minute mark here:



Of course the press misinterpreted his earlier statements to say it was this administration that was failing. Simply untrue.

Denmark and Poland are locking down their borders too (just as earlier Czech Republic and Ukraine).

So I guess after this weekend Europe could have closed borders all around.

Does anyone know whether Italy has a different method for reporting deaths due to the virus? Because the numbers coming out of Italy are pretty scary.

I have heard that Italy is the only country doing extensive post-mortem tests in all cases of respiratory illness of some kind.

Here's a link to a WHO map tracking infections by country.

https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/685d0ace521648f8a5beeeee1b9125cd