Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
We don't know that Vermont's lockdown was necessary. We do know that Sweden didn't lock down and got the "same" result you noted as Vermont.
And Vermont didn't need some "national plan" other than what the Federal government already did. It's called federalism. Separation of powers. Limited central government. States having far more power to shape their destiny than you seem to care for.
|
As usual you confuse power with leadership.
Just like the weak leader who had to gas people to go make a political statement and demonstrate his power.
All is not perfect in Sweden, though I’m surprised that your example of good behavior is a country with national healthcare, a generous safety net to support those who fell ill and guaranteed income. Perhaps that influenced their people to do the voluntary isolation.
Swedish’s top epidemiologist, Anders Tegnell, said in an interview with Swedish Radio that the country made some mistakes. “If we were to encounter the same illness with the same knowledge that we have today, I think our response would land somewhere in between what Sweden did and what the rest of the world has done,” he said.
In any case, the most instructive phase of Sweden’s approach may lie ahead: “It will be interesting to find out whether they can respond now, or whether they’re going to keep going with a strategy that seems like it’s not working,” says Schneider.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device