Coronavirus in America

A reality planet. Not one where unicorns are abundant.

You demand more from the US healthcare system than you do from any other health care system. My answer to you is, "There is no National Health System on earth that predicts maladies and reacts instantaneously to cure them.

What planet do you live on ... ?"

 

Ok? I also work ft and study in a busy PhD program. Your sense of entitlement says it all. Go get a job.

 

I can agree that the US defense budget is far too high. I can agree that reducing defense expenditures and passing some of the savings on to funding college education and national health care is a good idea. But that will not, would not have prevented Covid-19 or a similar epidemic nor made it less severe. Spending money on a thing doesn't necessarily make it better, nor does the source of the funding make much difference.

But you are only giving bald assertions unsupported by evidence. You introduce measurements of, say, US poverty levels, then tell others that those figures have no meaning in this debate. It seems that you are blowing smoke here. I am attacking your logic since you refuse to relate your unsupported so-called 'facts' to the subject.

 

Both sides had the same rules. If you don't like them, work to get them changed. Whether you like it or not, Trump was legally elected to be POTUS. I'm not a Trump guy, I just believe in following the rules even when I don't like the result.

 

DE GUSTIBUS NON DISPUTANDUM EST

I agree. The great failure with COV-19 is that when SARS happened in China (2002/4) nobody took action at the highest level. Who thought that an epidemic that caused at the time (beginning 16 November 2002) ‎774-deaths and 8,096 confirmed-cases‎ was something Very Serious - and should be considered at the highest levels (beginning with the WHO) for the means of preparedness the next time around.

Well, that NEXT TIME is upon us - so far the consequences are 536,617 cases and 24,119 deaths worldwide (as of today).

Having lived in Geneva, I know the WHO. Forget it. Beautiful building overlooking beautiful garden with a view of Lake Leman - a sinecure for show, and not much more. And SARS proved that point- the WHO got the first statistical assessment of the epidemic ALL WRONG. It has since been assumed by another body ...

Sorry you feel that way. But you are very, very wrong.

My assertions are based upon statistical fact when provable as such, and finding such fact aint easy. Believe me.

You've got blinders on - your problem, not mine ...

 

INCONSISTENCIES

There is legality and illegality and the election of a PotUS that defies the foundation of the Popular Vote as the sole definitive mechanism for electing a head-of-state is Dead Wrong.

No other major country on earth employs such a mechanism. And why?

Because they became democracies much later in the game. Europe gave great consideration after WW2 about how it wanted to reconstruct a democracy. It decided to avoid the Electoral College - and yet the political structure of both the US and the EU are greatly similar.

And as for your comment above about following the rules. It is pure nonsense, particularly in this case.

No one, no authority, no machination should manipulate the popular-vote as regards the election of the Head-of-state (or any other elective office)!. All major democracies on earth observe that rule except one - Uncle Sam. Which goes even further and manipulates the state-voting by means of Gerrymandering!

One must be a blind-fool not to see and understand the inconsistencies of American democracy as outlined above ... !

 

Bollocks.

The world's major healthcare system have been measured - to my knowledge having seen the reports - since the 1990s. Nowadays the oftentime annual reports are glaring.

One must be a damn fool to think that a report like this graphic below (sponsored by the Commonwealth Fund) is nonsense:

 

First, need a link to your graph or it's just cherry picked garbage. Now your claim is just that "national healthcare is better just cuz picture from Commonwealth fund." The Commonwealth fund is an extremely left leaning organization kind of like Media Matters or any other political organization.


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/commonwealth-fund/


Second, you are arguing with your own statements now. It seems just a wee bit ridiculous. Let me show you how to present facts. Here is a statement from a world renown school famous for their research in medicine (Johns Hopkins). They state taht the United States is first in their response for pandemics. Your OP addressed the response of the United States and wrongly claimed that their response is not adequate.

"The U.S. scored 83.5 and ranked No. 1 in five of six categories: prevention, early detection and reporting, rapid response and mitigation, sufficient and robust health system, and compliance with international norms."
https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/02/27/trum...-coronaviruscovid-19-649-em0-art1-dtd-health/

Notice how I produced a link to the information I presented. That is how honest debate is done. Now again, "There is no National Health System on earth that predicts maladies and reacts instantaneously to cure them.

What planet do you live on ... ?"

 

To clarify, I am not Republican or even right-wing. I am centrist, for the most part and a little left of center on some issues.

 

If finding facts to support your assertion is difficult, and you refuse to cite your sources, perhaps those sources are suspect. Just sayin'.

 

2 minutes ago I saw on the news that US has a 1.63% death rate from the virus. Italy is over 10%. Credit for the difference was given to our robust healthcare system in the US. So......I think that is enough said.

 

I would trade our system for S. Korea's in a heartbeat. They're not going to have tens of thousands die from this.

 

Except the WHO did something that will go down in history as a really smart move: they adopted a German Coronavirus test, which other countries then immediately started using. America, on the other hand, did something stupid that will also go down in history with blunders like 9/11 and Pearl Harbor: instead of using WHO's test, we decided to make our own. And here we are, and we still aren't doing enough tests.

 

It is too soon to know what percentage of those hospitalized, survive. But we do know the number of deaths have been doubling about every two days. So the death rate is following the rate of known infections in active areas.

 

South Korea has a population of 50 million compared to America's 330 million. South Korea is surrounded by water on three sides, and the one border they do have is about thee most locked-down border in the world. South Korea has a population that is 99% ethnic Koreans. South Korea practices social controls that border on the draconian.

Is that the sort of system you want for America?

Small, nearly-entirely homogenous population, Incredibly-secure borders, and a highly-authoritarian government.

That sound good to you?

 

Actually, in the sense that the US is following established rules until those rules are changed by the people, the system is absolutely correct.

Here is an analogy for you: I do things because I think they're the right and smart thing to do. When others decide to do things differently, I do not change my way of living to fit their perception of morality or intelligence. I'm willing to review my thoughts based on whether or not someone else seems to be achieving better results. But that does not seem to be the case with the EU. Britain is leaving, for instance.

Newer is not necessarily better.

The PM in the UK is the leader of the party that controls the house of commons. It is not subject to direct election at all. While the president of France is subject to direct election, the PM is appointed by him without any popular vote at all. THere are numerous other examples without even getting into dictatorships, theocraciesor monarchies on the planet.

Evidently you do not understand what gerrymandering is. It has no effect on the electoral college.

The US system, as all human systems, has flaws. However, it has passed the only real test that matters: it has endured to the present day. It works, regardless of your complaints about its inequities. France is on its fifth republic now, the US is on its second, counting the Articles of Confederation as first. Based on that evidence,I would say that France should possibly look into a more American model for its gov't.