Ron Paul: The Coronavirus Hoax

Former Congressman Ron Paul was the 1988 presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party. His two runs for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 and 2012 brought notice to the libertarian movement.  He published the following editorial on the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity site on Monday: 

Governments love crises because when the people are fearful they are more willing to give up freedoms for promises that the government will take care of them. After 9/11, for example, Americans accepted the near-total destruction of their civil liberties in the PATRIOT Act’s hollow promises of security.

It is ironic to see the same Democrats who tried to impeach President Trump last month for abuse of power demanding that the Administration grab more power and authority in the name of fighting a virus that thus far has killed less than 100 Americans.

Declaring a pandemic emergency on Friday, President Trump now claims the power to quarantine individuals suspected of being infected by the virus and, as Politico writes, “stop and seize any plane, train or automobile to stymie the spread of contagious disease.” He can even call out the military to cordon off a US city or state.

State and local authoritarians love panic as well. The mayor of Champaign, Illinois, signed an executive order declaring the power to ban the sale of guns and alcohol and cut off gas, water, or electricity to any citizen. The governor of Ohio just essentially closed his entire state.

For the rest, click here

34 thoughts on “Ron Paul: The Coronavirus Hoax

  1. Jill Pyeatt

    The strange thing is that no one seems to know anyone who has the disease. They keep telling us the numbers will explode–but they don’t. I think we’ll know in ten days how bad it will get, because by next weekend people will have hunkered down for more than 2 weeks, and, since there’s a 14-day incubation, the big numbers of sick people will show up–or won’t.

  2. Just Some Random Guy

    It is ironic to see the same Democrats who tried to impeach President Trump last month for abuse of power demanding that the Administration grab more power and authority in the name of fighting a virus that thus far has killed less than 100 Americans.

    This seems to be ignoring the fact that the point of the various actions the government has taken is to KEEP the number low. But more importantly, what does he think IS the proper death toll for a disease to meet before enacting these measures? Without telling us that, this argument is meaningless.

  3. Tony From Long Island

    Oh No. . . . . Ron Paul should be embarrassed to put forth such utter shit.

  4. Tony From Long Island

    How utterly disappointing that Ron Paul would put forth this irresponsible nonsense.

  5. Rev. James Clifton

    I’ve been saying for 30 years that Ron Paul was a nut job. Believe me now?

  6. Rev. Jame Clifton

    “The strange thing is that no one seems to know anyone who has the disease. ”

    Are you genuinely serious?

  7. Paulie

    Ironically, Ron Paul’s son Rand is now the first US Senator to be officially diagnosed positive for COVID.

  8. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    Just Some Random Guy: what does he think IS the proper death toll for a disease to meet before enacting these measures?

    Tens of thousands die in car accidents every year, yet we don’t shut down the roads.

    Ten of thousands die of flu every year, yet we don’t shut down the economy.

    Hundreds of thousands die of heart disease and cancer every year. Yet again, we don’t shut down the economy.

    I’d say that, unless the death toll is over those numbers, say, at least a million, you shouldn’t even consider shutting down the national economy — plunging us into, not a Recession, but a Depression with a D.

    Some are predicting 20% unemployment. Landlords and homeowners unable to pay the mortgage. A depression will last for a decade or more in lost opportunities, in careers and businesses never started, in families never formed.

    Instead of destroying the economy, you tough it out. Take rational measures. Inform people of the risks, warn them to wash their hands frequently — but let them decide if they want to stay at home, or quit their jobs, or shut their businesses.

    I’m sure businesses and patrons can take rational, mitigation measures, short of tanking the economy.

  9. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    After 9/11, Harry Browne was one of the few sane public voices. Weeks after 9/11, he opposed the invasion — not of Iraq — but of Afghanistan.

    And now, Ron Paul is one of the few sane public voices out there.

  10. paulie

    Tens of thousands die in car accidents every year, yet we don’t shut down the roads.

    Ten of thousands die of flu every year, yet we don’t shut down the economy.

    Hundreds of thousands die of heart disease and cancer every year. Yet again, we don’t shut down the economy.

    I’d say that, unless the death toll is over those numbers, say, at least a million, you shouldn’t even consider shutting down the national economy — plunging us into, not a Recession, but a Depression with a D.

    Car accidents, heart disease and cancer are not infectious so that’s not a good comparison. The flu is the closest cxomparison you made but is not a good one since there is medical treatment to both prevent and treat it, and none yet for COVID. It spreads as quickly and easily as common flus or cold, perhaps even more so, but is a lot more deadly in terms of the numbers of people it infects. That’s why Italy’s hospitals are already overwhelmed and New York’s are about to be, with the rest of the US not far behind.

    Unchecked, corona doubles in less than a week’s time. There’s no way to contain it short of extremely disruptive measures. Without those, best available estimate is 40-80% of the population is likely to get it, of which 1-3% is likely to die. If so, that is in fact millions of people, concentrated within just a few months. About 5 times as many will be severely ill. An even larger percentage might die without medical care, which is unlikely to be available on such a scale.

    That’s going to majorly disrupt the economy regardless of what government does or does not do. I don’t see government as having enough money, knowledge, personnel, or resources of any kind to solve the problem. The best it can hope to do with these measures is to flatten the transmission curve to allow medical resources to catch up, but it looks like it will probably fail at that. It’s likely to only exacerbate the coming disaster which is just barely beginning.

  11. paulie

    I’ve been saying for 30 years that Ron Paul was a nut job. Believe me now?

    He has many good sides, but his bad sides are becoming less possible to ignore for me as time goes on.

  12. paulie

    How utterly disappointing that Ron Paul would put forth this irresponsible nonsense.

    It’s not very surprising. We’ll see whether or when he changes his tune. At the time he wrote this the US had less than a hundred deaths total. It’s now up to a hundred a day and soon will be much higher than that.

  13. paulie

    The strange thing is that no one seems to know anyone who has the disease.

    If you don’t you will soon.

    They keep telling us the numbers will explode–but they don’t. I

    They actually are exploding. Check out the day by day numbers and compare it with past day by day numbers in Italy.

    I think we’ll know in ten days how bad it will get, because by next weekend people will have hunkered down for more than 2 weeks, and, since there’s a 14-day incubation, the big numbers of sick people will show up–or won’t.

    Not exactly. The incubation period before symptoms show up is usually 5-10 days but can be 24, maybe more. Some people never get symptoms yet still spread it. Lots of people have not hunkered down, and even those who have still interact with people or with things other people touch to some extent. Once symptoms develop it seems to be 2-3 weeks before people die. So, the people dying now probably got infected a month ago and the people getting infected now won’t die for another month.

    Italy has not yet peaked in confirmed infections and may or may not have peaked in daily deaths – the numbers are not clear yet – after two weeks of national shutdown, longer in the worst hit areas, and the beginnings of more serious quarantine. The US is just starting to approach the levels of action taken in Italy in the first few states within the last couple of days. From what I have read our medical system is less prepared in terms of personnel, facilities and equipment, so it’s likely to be worse here than there.

  14. Scotty Boman

    This is a poorly titled but responsible statement. He doesn’t write that it is a hoax. He even concedes people will die from it. He is condemning the way politicians are exploiting it in order to violate our liberties and expand their power over our lives.

    I have been writing long enough to know that the titles on articles often differ from those originally suggested by the author. If this is his choice of a title, it is a bad choice designed to be click bait.

  15. Scotty Boman

    This is the raw form of a resolution rejected by the Michigan Libertarian Executive Committee today. The changes, made before the vote, only effected some terminology and grammar. Objections included the assertion that it looked like we were calling the virus a hoax (even though it explicitly says otherwise), and that it would make us look bad. There was also the objection that we weren’t recommending the voluntary closure of businesses that politicians deemed “non-essential.”

    Resolution Condemning Governor Whitmer’s Response to the Coronavirus Outbreak

    By Ben Carr

    The Libertarian Party wishes to proclaim its strong condemnation of the recent actions of Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer in response to the spread of COVID-19, also called the Coronavirus.

    Governor Whitmer’s actions are a violation of the natural human rights of free movement and interaction, and the recent restrictions on local businesses and public meetings will do irreparable harm to the economy of the state of Michigan, at both the personal and public level, which will be felt in the form of lost jobs, homes, and small businesses. The Governor’s abuse of state executive authority will only continue to create panic and needlessly isolate thousands of citizens who require personal and economic interactions to survive. While we recognize the severity of the coronavirus we do not believe such conditions grant the state additional powers, and instead advocate voluntary participation in science-based measures to prevent the spread of the virus. This includes social distancing, rigorous hygiene, and use of personal protective equipment. The lifting of these restraints will allow not only for the movement of needed goods and supplies, especially to the most vulnerable during such a time, but will also allow for the charitable aid, and the advent and spread of needed developments for testing and medical technologies that the existing system will not be able to meet. The current measures are both oppressive and incapable of dealing with the crises without the inclusion of aid on the part of private citizens.

    We therefore call on Governor Whitmer to lift the authoritarian restrictions in place and restore the human rights of movement and interaction to the citizens of Michigan, as well as guaranteeing their rights to both property and bodily autonomy. We also call upon the public servants of Michigan to resist these edicts and act to protect the rights of their constituents. Most importantly, we implore the citizens of Michigan to speak out against these egregious violations of human rights and demand a return to sanity and freedom.

  16. paulie

    This is a poorly titled but responsible statement.

    It’s not in any way responsible. He writes as if the numbers of people who died at the very beginning is indicative of what will end up happening and as if sunshine on the beach will keep it from being spread through proximity. As a medical professional he knows better.

  17. dL

    Governments love crises

    They love phony crises; they tend not to react well to real ones, however.

    It is ironic to see the same Democrats who tried to impeach President Trump last month for abuse of power demanding that the Administration grab more power and authority in the name of fighting a virus that thus far has killed less than 100 Americans.

    If one had a superficial grasp of american politics, one might think it was ironic.

    By contrast, tuberculosis, an old disease not much discussed these days, killed nearly 1.6 million people in 2017. Where’s the panic over this?

    Eh, I looked that one up. 9,000 cases of TB in the United States in 2017.

    The panic produced by these fearmongers is likely helping spread the disease, as massive crowds rush into Walmart and Costco for that last roll of toilet paper.

    The impromptu travel ban certainly aided in its spread. All the returning cattle herded into a few airports all at once.

    People should ask themselves whether this coronavirus “pandemic” could be a big hoax, with the actual danger of the disease massively exaggerated by those who seek to profit – financially or politically – from the ensuing panic.

    Absolutely. Never take government fear mongering at face value. However, the hoaxes tend to be relegated to the overused term, epidemic. For example, the recent e-cigarette respiratory disease epidemic hoax. Pandemics, though, tend to be real. Hoax vs “Oh my god, government please declare martial law” is a false dilemma. You can certainly take the position that covid-19 is a serious pandemic while questioning the wisdom of central planning to kill off X number of industries in order to save the health care industry. This absolutely is textbook road to serfdom stuff.

    instead of going outdoors or to the beach where the sunshine and fresh air would help boost immunity.

    well, you know, they have vitamin d supplements for that.

    But we have seen this movie before.

    Actually, we haven’t seen this movie before. Governments have never resorted to a coordinated global wide shutdown before because the cure obviously would be worse than the disease. Apparently, food service apps now make all this mass quarantine business possible. Of course, that rests on the implicit assumption that delivery workers are magically immune to covid-19.

  18. dL

    As a medical professional he knows better.

    Wouldn’t be the first time the business of producing content for Ron Paul, Inc was outsourced to an underling.

  19. Just Some Random Guy

    @ Root’s Teeth Are Awesome

    Tens of thousands die in car accidents every year, yet we don’t shut down the roads.

    Ten of thousands die of flu every year, yet we don’t shut down the economy.

    Hundreds of thousands die of heart disease and cancer every year. Yet again, we don’t shut down the economy.

    I’d say that, unless the death toll is over those numbers, say, at least a million, you shouldn’t even consider shutting down the national economy — plunging us into, not a Recession, but a Depression with a D.

    Well, I feel paulie already explained why those comparisons don’t work–but you at least gave a number, which is more than Ron Paul did.

  20. dL

    The US is just starting to approach the levels of action taken in Italy in the first few states within the last couple of days. From what I have read our medical system is less prepared in terms of personnel, facilities and equipment, so it’s likely to be worse here than there.

    There’s little doubt that NY City is going to be hit similarly. Unlike the situation in Italy, there are expecting it. However, I’m not sure they are ready for it. From my understanding(anecdotal sources), most of the hospital capacity has been redeployed to deal strictly with covid-19. Bad time for a New Yorker to have an accident, a heart attack, give child birth etc. Unclear at this time if this same situation is going to play out similarly everywhere else in the US.

    Occasionally, a particularly bad flu season will challenge hospital capacity(e.g, 2017-2018 seasonal flu). It would be unprecedented in our lifetime for a city like NY to mobile near 100% capacity ahead of time and still be overwhelmed.

  21. paulie

    There’s little doubt that NY City is going to be hit similarly. Unlike the situation in Italy, there are expecting it. However, I’m not sure they are ready for it.

    It’s already obvious they are not ready for it and we are still far from the peak.

    Unclear at this time if this same situation is going to play out similarly everywhere else in the US.

    It’s pretty clear that it will. Several other cities are already getting hospitals overwhelmed and still even further from a peak than NYC. People travel in and out of NYC to every part of the country all the time, including many asymptomatic and/or undiagnosed COVID carriers, and the virus was already in many other cities independently of NYC as well. It may have multiplied more rapidly in NY due to general lack of social distancing and more international contact, but the problem in the South may end up worse than NYC because of political attitudes here and the trend among Trump, FOX et al to minimize the coming problem. Also, NYC was probably more prepared in terms of hospital capacity, staff and equipment than a lot of other places.

    By the time NYC is much worse than now and multiple other areas are dealing with problems like NY is having now or worse all at the same time the range of possible response options will narrow. I don’t see anything heading that off, and it’s most likely too late in any case.

  22. paulie

    Well, I feel paulie already explained why those comparisons don’t work–but you at least gave a number, which is more than Ron Paul did.

    What kind of economy can we expect to have with a million people (or maybe ten million) dying from a pandemic and health care totally overwhelmed? Are people just blithely going to go to work and ignore the deaths of their family members, coworkers, neighbors and friends, as well as the dangers to themselves? Will they go out to shop, eat, entertain, etc in nearly the same way as before under those circumstances? What about the millions of people whose livelihood is tied to the health care system?

    The idea that the government has some kind of option to make the economy normal, either by doing something or by doing nothing, doesn’t seem very realistic.

  23. paulie

    Wouldn’t be the first time the business of producing content for Ron Paul, Inc was outsourced to an underling.

    True.

  24. Tony From Long Island

    ” . . . . . . .The strange thing is that no one seems to know anyone who has the disease.

    If you don’t you will soon. . . . . . ”

    Ya know someone who knows a person with the virus? RON PAUL

  25. dL

    It’s pretty clear that it will. Several…

    Several is not everywhere. What’s the point of the 30 day shelter in place order I’m currently living under if every location in the United States is destined to have an ICU crunch in the next 2 weeks. I assume “flattening the curve” works to mitigate short-term ICU crunch.

    It may have multiplied more rapidly in NY due to general lack of social distancing

    Ya, think? 70% of the dense population goes to work by means of subway, metro, commuter rail or walking. That’s why it has been hit in a condensed crunch(along w/ the fact, of course, it is an international hub).

    but the problem in the South may end up worse than NYC

    Um, cities/counties are busy dictating their own shelter in place orders. The one I’m under is a local city/county order. No one is waiting on POTUS or the governor.

    Also, NYC was probably more prepared in terms of hospital capacity, staff and equipment than a lot of other places.

    In terms of per capita capacity, they weren’t.

    What kind of economy can we expect to have with a million people (or maybe ten million) dying from a pandemic and health care totally overwhelmed?

    https://www.stlouisfed.org/~/media/files/pdfs/community-development/research-reports/pandemic_flu_report.pdf

    The economic impacts of the Spanish flu pandemic were significant but short-lived. That despite the fact the pandemic lasted 2 years because of a mutation. It came in waves. The second wave(after the mutation) was much more deadly than the first wave. With governments trying to central plan the covid-19 pandemic curve, I imagine the potential short term deleterious impact on the health care industry will be mitigated…at the cost of the general economic impacts being long-lived.

  26. paulie

    Several is not everywhere. What’s the point of the 30 day shelter in place order I’m currently living under if every location in the United States is destined to have an ICU crunch in the next 2 weeks. I assume “flattening the curve” works to mitigate short-term ICU crunch.

    1) Not all areas will experience the crunch at the same time.
    2) It will be worse sooner without the mitigation measures
    3) The mitigation measures might work, but there is no reason to assume they will. I think it’s more likely they will ultimately fail.

    What’s happening in the US, which as I predicted now has a steeper curve than any nation with a major problem thus far including Spain, Italy and France, is that distancing measures and especially compliance are reactive. In other words, once symptomatic cases and deaths in any given area get bad enough they tend to get successively more stringent restrictions, which are mostly not heavily enforced and are frequently flouted by many people. The problem with this approach is that by this point any such given area will have had an extra month of transmission that will not get to the critical stage for a month or so later, by that point overwhelming health care resources, which are also being shored up in a reactive rather than proactive way. In the meantime the problem spreads to additional areas which in turn generally respond reactively rather than proactively.

    By the time a crescendo is reached nationally, the peak will be in numerous areas which have a higher than national average of poverty, ill health, understaffed, underfunded and ill equipped hospitals, higher than average numbers of uninsured, local officials who waited longer to try their half measures for ideological reasons, more people who live further from medical care and have financial and transportation issues along with health issues. And even when the governments get around to their too late half measures the people have been told by the sources they trust for too long that it’s not a real problem. I hear it all the time down here in Alabama.

    Ya, think? 70% of the dense population goes to work by means of subway, metro, commuter rail or walking. That’s why it has been hit in a condensed crunch(along w/ the fact, of course, it is an international hub).

    True, but that just means they got it earlier. It is spreading to other areas and will spread to more.

    Um, cities/counties are busy dictating their own shelter in place orders. The one I’m under is a local city/county order.

    They are not very effective. Compliance ranges from 60% in iirc DC to virtually 0% in Wyoming. Alabama gets a “D” on the letter grade scale in the bottom tier of states just above Wyoming. It’s easy for people under local orders like in Birmingham to go shop in the suburbs, which are not. It’s not very effective.

    In terms of per capita capacity, they weren’t.

    I think even in per capita terms they were. It just seems otherwise because they got hit hardest first due to density and international travel, but we ain’t seen nothing yet. We’re still at somewhere between 5% to 0.5% or perhaps even less of the people who will die or will need to be hospitalized in the next few months,

  27. paulie

    https://www.stlouisfed.org/~/media/files/pdfs/community-development/research-reports/pandemic_flu_report.pdf

    The economic impacts of the Spanish flu pandemic were significant but short-lived. That despite the fact the pandemic lasted 2 years because of a mutation. It came in waves. The second wave(after the mutation) was much more deadly than the first wave. With governments trying to central plan the covid-19 pandemic curve, I imagine the potential short term deleterious impact on the health care industry will be mitigated…at the cost of the general economic impacts being long-lived.

    It’s a very different world than a hundred years ago. Back then life expectancy was half or so of what it is now. Most people worked in small scale agriculture. Most of the rest worked in occupations that where they were easily replaced if and when they died, which happened often, and did not travel much. There was very little reliance on complicated global sourcing or supply chains or businesses which involved a lot of travel, much less raw materials found only in some parts of the world or highly specialized occupations. Nowadays we rely much, much more on specialized people, knowledge and training which are not easily replaced when many die or can’t go to work, international sourcing of raw materials, shipping through supply chains, assembly and delivery, etc.

    Also back then there was no effective birth control. People had lots of kids and it was normal to see some of them die. Lots of women died in childbirth. While there are still some countries where that is the case now, it’s not in the US, Europe, Canada, Japan, Australia, Israel, etc. People would not react normally to multiple members of their families dying now as if it’s normal.

    Even elderly people dying at an age where they can be expected to die is not as simple as it was. Nowadays people have gotten used to extensive medical care with teams of doctors prolonging the lives of their sick and elderly relatives at great expense with lots of individual attention. They won’t take it in stride when that is not the case. When they do die, estates and estate disputes are a much more complicated thing than a hundred years ago when few people had any estate to speak of.

    The medical system is a huge part of the economy now. Dining out, entertainment, travel and recreation, all big parts of the economy as is retail. All that is getting majorly disrupted. It would be disrupted with or without stay at home orders. It will be disrupted when deaths multiply and even long after they settle down. The petroleum and automotive market is majorly disrupted as is aviation and everything involved with it. It’s not just quickly and easily going to get back to normal no matter how things shake out, and wouldn’t have continued as normal if governments did nothing.

    Central planning is bound to be a clusterfuck, but it would have been a different kind of clusterfuck no matter what governments did or did not do.

  28. dL

    It’s a very different world than a hundred years ago. Back then life expectancy was half or so of what it is now.

    The life expectancy figures from 100 years ago were skewed by high infant mortality rates. A child who made to age 5 in 1918 would have a life expectancy only slightly lower than a child today at age 5. The very different world from 100 years ago is that there was no mass media back then to broadcast the mass graves being dug. That, and the fact governments essentially censured the media from reporting on it because there was a global war going on.

    Central planning is bound to be a clusterfuck, but it would have been a different kind of clusterfuck no matter what governments did or did not do.

    Agree. I don’t think any political economic system fares particularly well in a once in a century pandemic. However, a hypothetical foresight that would have planned ample oxygen ventilators, masks, gloves and testing could have easily controlled covid-19 without having to resort to global quarantines. Governments claim to have such expertise and foresight, but rarely exhibit it.

  29. dL

    True, but that just means they got it earlier. It is spreading to other areas and will spread to more.

    No, it means they all got it at the same time. The mortality results are lot different if a population gets it at the same time with inadequate hospital capacity versus one that gets it over a longer period of time with adequate hospital capacity.

    We’re still at somewhere between 5% to 0.5%

    0.5%? Please, that would mean 10 million deaths in the United States.. I won’t play message board epidemiologist, but I will play message board mathematician. Absurd.

  30. paulie

    No, it means they all got it at the same time. The mortality results are lot different if a population gets it at the same time with inadequate hospital capacity versus one that gets it over a longer period of time with adequate hospital capacity.

    Perhaps I communicated that poorly. The peak in other areas is projected to be later than in NY. It remains to be seen how high the peak will be where or how well or poorly they will handle it. A lot of other things are yet to be determined such as whether summer/heat has the same effect on covid as on flu (preliminary results indicate no), whether various proposed treatments may mitigate the problem or not, whether they may make it worse, whether the virus will mutate to become worse, whether we will see successive waves after restrictions life or as people get tired of being cooped up, and so on.

  31. paulie

    0.5%? Please, that would mean 10 million deaths in the United States.. I won’t play message board epidemiologist, but I will play message board mathematician. Absurd.

    You are off by an order of magnitude. At the time I wrote this the US death rate was reported at around 5,000. It has since more than tripled and the rate is still going up. 5,000 x 200 is one million, not ten. It’s not absurd that it could be a million or more. It looks like it won’t approach that in the first wave, but there may be several this year, with successive ones being worse.

    I agree ten million is unlikely from corona alone, at least in the first year. That would take some second and third order disasters spinning off, which is also entirely possible. At that point all bets are off. Although, that was really not my point at all.

    Best available evidence, imperfect as it is, is that with no social distancing at all it’s likely the rate would have climbed much more steeply and not slowed down until a million, maybe two. That is a stand alone statement which has nothing to do with whether any of what the government did was a good idea or a bad one. I think that outcome is still entirely possible because, even though the distancing has seemed to have worked thus far and the beginnings of a slowing of the spread are showing, we don’t know yet what happens in a few months.

    My point was that regardless of whether the government did what it did, something else, or nothing, massive economic distruption would have taken place. I gave several reasons which taken together show that many people dying from a contagious disease in today’s world would be much more economically disruptive than a hundred years ago.

  32. paulie

    The life expectancy figures from 100 years ago were skewed by high infant mortality rates. A child who made to age 5 in 1918 would have a life expectancy only slightly lower than a child today at age 5. The very different world from 100 years ago is that there was no mass media back then to broadcast the mass graves being dug. That, and the fact governments essentially censured the media from reporting on it because there was a global war going on.

    Thanks for mentioning one of the many factors I mentioned and one I did not, but you ignored most of the ones I did. I mentioned that a lot of kids died as kids. This has an important psychological aspect because most families had experienced that and did not see it as something bizarrely tragic, just an unfortunate part of life. Likewise they did not have the same kinds of expectations people in the developed world or whatever you want to call it have now that extraordinary steps are routinely taken to treat sick and dying people, including the very old. A sudden shift in that would have a huge impact on society and the economy.

    I also mentioned a number of other factors why it would now far more than then, which was by no means an exhaustive list.

  33. paulie

    Agree. I don’t think any political economic system fares particularly well in a once in a century pandemic.

    Yes, that was my point. We got off on tangents.

    However, a hypothetical foresight that would have planned ample oxygen ventilators, masks, gloves and testing could have easily controlled covid-19 without having to resort to global quarantines. Governments claim to have such expertise and foresight, but rarely exhibit it.

    Government is monumentally incompetent. I’m not sure why that is surprising. It’s always that way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *