George Rebane
We are now in HD47 and watching how the national lockdown has slowly turned from a health safety policy to yet another political match between the Left and the Trump administration. These days we do a lot of reading about C19, recognizing new data on the extent of existing herd immunity, greatly lowered death rates, and contagion numbers a bit higher than the annual flu, in addition to the curves already being flattened. And therefore, by our lights it’s long-past time to end the lockdown; at least start a rapid phased loosening of commerce that’s based on regional factors.
It is clear which side wants maximum misery and economic disruption/destruction in these months leading up to the election. The party with no policy but continuing criticism of those fighting the pandemic is working wonders to rend the country during this global pandemic.
In the meantime, we note that Placerville has already appealed to Gov Newsom about pulling back on his ‘one size fits all’ statewide C19 proscriptions so favored by socialists. Placerville correctly argues that it is a low-density rural town which does not compare with LA and the other metro areas of the state. Meanwhile, our own county and city governments continue to meekly toe the lockdown line, making not a discernible peep to Sacramento as to the growing insanity and hardship of practicing the statewide policy in these foothills. The correct way forward here is to let the shops and public spaces open, and then deal with any jackboot responses from state bureaucrats – always better to ask for forgiveness than permission. What the hell can they do to us anyway as other states and regions of similar descriptions are already going on with their lives?
In the ‘don’t let a crisis go to waste’ department, we note that California has now issued a new set of guidelines to start statewide death panels in healthcare facilities like clinics and hospitals. People will be scored based on age and health to determine their priority/access to healthcare. The whole process is sold on the basis of “life-cycle considerations” to allocate treatment resources. The idea being that older folks have already had enough enjoyment out of life, and since the younger ones haven’t, scores based on age should be used in allocating limited care. There is no provision in these guidelines for other factors like the social contributions that many older people continue to provide their communities. (more here)
I think such an allocation policy has been done informally on a case-by-case basis for years, and I see nothing wrong with that practice. But bureaucratized formalization is a giant step toward bringing the state into the middle of intimate doctor-patient relationships, and a notch away from new requirements for healthcare professionals having to request permission before providing this or that type of care, and then reporting what was provided and its aftermath. As most of us know, once this kind of command/control starts, it is almost impossible to walk back. And within the greater embrace of encroaching socialism, in America it has already started.
In the 23apr20 WSJ Dan Henninger writes a compelling column – ‘How We’ll Live With Coronavirus’ – wherein he argues that human nature will trump egregious lockdown policies, and people will learn to live with C19 as just another disease that needs to be recognized and dealt with in the daily round, much as we did with all the other dreaded diseases before we eventually conquered them. Extended cowering has never been a prominent part of how people behave – save perhaps under the tender mercies of a KGB or Stasi.
[update] Newsom’s 6-point plan to lift lockdown was released about a week ago – I forgot to mention it above. On the face of it, his plan ranges somewhere between cynical and insane. For openers, most of its provisions are either unattainable or will only come to pass in the far future. You can review them here. His message to the state’s idiots is a warning that the dependers on relaxing the shutdown would hang on “science, not politics”. Now that is one the largest cartloads of bullcrap any politician has delivered in a long time. Of course his decision will depend on politics – the current delay in opening up already confirms it. The many considerations that will go into his actual decision will be munged over only in the political arena, and science will enter in only for CYA purposes to camouflage some more partisan and self-serving factor that cannot be revealed to the public.
The whole thing reeks of the usual subterfuge used to cover the socialists’ perpetual campaign to remove citizens’ rights and freedoms. I’m reminded of the ongoing 2A battle that cites ‘gun violence’ as its raison d’etre. There the Left has been diligent in constructively abrogating our 2A rights. How? By not being able to directly confiscate our firearms, they instead continue to pass collateral laws and regulations which make their purchase, possession, storage, transport, use, and purchase of related equipments (e.g. ammo for openers) between difficult to illegal. This approach works wonderfully with those in the land grouped under the ‘myth of the rational voter’ (cf. Bryan Caplan).
rebanesruminations.com 
Leave a comment