Government policy is based on averages. But there is no such thing as average…it’s an arithmetic concept, not a practical one. Average is intended to describe “tendency”, not reality. When a small group of outliers skews an average in one direction the picture painted by the data can be highly misleading. Let’s say there’s a small town where the average household income is $50,000 per year. If Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett were to move into the town and average household income recalculated, the average wouldn’t be very representative would it?
Government policy is also based on categorizations. – putting groups into neat boxes. But this also distorts reality. For example, the government’s definition of a ‘small business”, causes a 5 employee hair salon to be lumped together with a 500 employee manufacturing firm and be subjected to the same lockdown order. Policies that are intended to make people safe or ensure economic survival in a factory aren’t going to adequately or correctly help the hair salon, yet that’s the way government regulations are applied and assistance is apportioned. Makes for poor policy with obvious results like protests and defiance!
Someone famously pointed out that two quarters of declining GDP may technically be a recession, but for the family breadwinner out of work it’s a depression! It doesn’t matter to the mid 50’s manager whose job was eliminated in a “right-sizing” at the company he or she works for that unemployment is at 3.5%!
Permit me to rephrase an old saying:
“Government can help some of the people some of the time. It can help a tiny few people all of the time. But it can’t help the “average” person most of the time.”
In short, government and politicians’ reliance on data, statistics, numbers and all their associated manipulations is a very messy way to devise policy.
This is why the less government the better. The less government regulation the better And conversely, the more self-reliance, the better. The more self-regulation, the better.
Let’s consider for a moment what would happen in the absence of government mandated Wuhan Virus lockdowns. Reasonable, responsible and self-reliant individuals would protect themselves, sneeze and cough into their handkerchiefs or tissues, protect their elderly relatives by staying away from them, and no doubt wear masks and wash their hands frequently knowing there was an airborne, highly contagious, nasty bug around. People getting sick would call in sick, (“I’ve got the flu and don’t want to infect everyone around me!”) and as soon as they got better, would go back to work.
If you asked an epidemiologist whether there IS such a thing as a common cold, they’d respond by citing a laundry list of rhinoviruses and bacteria that cause “cold-like symptoms.” I urge you to read the description of the Common Cold on the Mayo Clinic website, here. And there’s no cure for it!
Now we’re finding out there are a lot of people who have had the Wuhan Virus, were either asymptomatic or had only mild, temporary symptoms…just like the common cold.
This is not to suggest that the Wuhan Virus is no worse than the common cold, nor diminish the severity of this bug for those with compromised immune systems, underlying risk factors, other ailments like chronic respiratory disease, etc. Of course people with these conditions are more vulnerable, and of course we need to take extra precautions with them. And of course they need to take extra precautions themselves!
Had the government simply warned us of the severity of the threat as data was received instead of fueling the “if it bleeds it leads” media crowd, I can’d help but suspect we’d all have been better off.
And, on a personal level, I happen to fit into the category of the more vulnerable. Would I have taken extra precautions as I am now without government megalomania? Yes. Would I have run to get tested when not having any symptoms? No. Is there a chance I’d have gotten sick. Yup.
But there’s a chance I might contract a severe case of the flu, bronchitis and then septicemia that I’d have to fight too. Or have a stroke. Or get hit by a car walking across the street. Or contract Ebola. Or be shot by a crazed sniper. Or be hit by a meteor. Or be struck by lightening (er…well, I HAVE been struck by lightening but that’s another story…) That there’s a chance to get sick or die or be killed in any of a hundred ways doesn’t automatically mean the likelihood is greater.
If instead of displaying a graph showing the rising deaths from the Virus, we saw one that simultaneously displayed other deaths, Wuhan Virus, as horrible as it is, wouldn’t appear so horrible! Here are CDC’s numbers for 2017. I’ve added Wuhan VIrus to show where it stacks up. Oh, and by the way, let’s not forget that of the deaths attributed to the Virus, many were caused by underlying heart, metastatic, or chronic respiratory ailments exacerbated, no doubt, by the Virus.
Number of deaths for leading causes of death in 2017:
- Heart disease: 647,457
- Cancer: 599,108
- Accidents (unintentional injuries): 169,936
- Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 160,201
- Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 146,383
- Alzheimer’s disease: 121,404
- Diabetes: 83,564
- Wuhan Virus: 80,000+
- Influenza and Pneumonia: 55,672
- Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis: 50,633
- Intentional self-harm (suicide): 47,173
Source: CDC
As I’ve also noted often, EVERYTHING is political. Thus, it’s in the interests of Leftist politicians to report as many virus-related deaths as possible so as to support their case that the Trump administration is incompetent. That’s why Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York suddenly, one day a couple of weeks ago, increased the total of virus-related deaths by several thousand. He simply declared that any death that could remotely be associated either directly with the Wuhan Virus, or even indirectly, be counted as a virus-related death. Why? For the obvious reason stated above.
So, talk about shooting ourselves in the foot! We’re crippling our economy, causing immense emotional distress, and in just about every way doing exactly what our political, economic and military adversaries want us to do!
Hooray, therefore, for the protestors storming state capitols demanding the lifting of lockdown restrictions. Hooray for Shelley Luther, who stood up to a condescending, megalomaniacal judge. Hooray for the increasing number of law enforcement officers defying orders to arrest otherwise law abiding people defying lockdown orders. Hooray for the front line health care and other workers who are choosing to help their fellow human beings. Hooray for the military and law enforcement of our country who are at risk every minute of every day while seeking to keep us safe. And finally, hooray for the AVERAGE (.sic) Americans who have had enough of this constant drone of gloom and doom and, despite risk, want to responsibly, thoughtfully and carefully return to living!
