Gene&Mary":n8o01nu3 said:
We all have biases. The writers of the article above and the organization they represent definitely has theirs.
Looking for biases is a favorite of mine. I used to love watching the commentator Charles Krauthammer. He generally started out by building a straw man with a statement like "They want to insure that all welfare recipients eat steak every night." Those who shared his bias waited for his well reasoned refutation without even examining the premise. He would spend the next several minutes showing how wrong "they" are, despite the fact that "they" don't exist. What was fascinating was the number of times the straw man won the argument or at least reached a draw. He didn't seem to care as apparently just the way that he stated his premise was enough to get viewers agreeing with him.
My new favorite is a retired "judge" who gives legal opinions on one of the news show. A judge starts out as an attorney. When they retire, they return to being an attorney. An attorney advocates for a client. The bad public reputation of attorneys is usually because they are willing to present crazy arguments and novel theories on behalf of their client. If it isn't an outright lie (and that is sometimes difficult to assess), then the attorney presents it in the most persuasive light using their most authoritative voice. "I say, it is absolutely unconstitutional to blah, blah, blah."
So who is now this retired judge's client? It isn't very difficult to figure it out given the arguments that he makes on TV. There is a Code of Judicial Conduct which precludes a judge from publically opining on issues that may come before them. Obviously this "judge" doesn't intend to ever be a real judge again and is probably making more money advocating for his new client. The client gets viewership and advertising revenue, so everybody is happy.
We all have a bias as to which is more important, public health or personal wealth and it isn't an either or proposition. There is no doubt that Governor Inslee's shut down saved lives. It can be argued that the lives saved were not worth the damage to the economy, and we can then fall into claiming some of the deaths were not "real" deaths or that the damage to the economy was not "real" damage. We will never get to an apples to apples analysis since most of us probably believe that death is permanent and a recession isn't.
It is also likely premature to undertake an analysis of the damage right now. We are up against an invisible boogie man that we don't even understand completely.
Some are weighing the economy/public health impact based on the quick development of a vaccine. Instances where household pets are carriers of the virus might change the balance of the scale. Does your pet also need a vaccine? Herd immunity has worked in the past for some diseases and not for others. How do we know Covid-19 is one that responds to herd immunity? We are not even through identifying all the various ways that it kills. Finally, there are instances where a proven vaccination doesn't work for some asymptomatic carriers (as was the case with Typhoid Mary). What percentage of the population will that be? If you survived your first bout with Covid, what about your third or fifth?
Well on that happy note, I'll leave the unknown and unknowable elements of the economic recovery for a later date.
Today I am finishing my new cockpit curtains! $450 in material. All PVC (no moldy Sunbrella). All Dot twist fasteners (no moldy zippers). I snuck down the boat yesterday for a dry fit. I'll make a few changes today and be ready for whenever boating opens. I hope that they are Covid proof.