Tweet
Fauci: The US is still in the first wave of COVID-19
The U.S. is more like Europe as a whole than Europe as represented by viewing a series of independent countries. Sweden is slightly smaller than California with 1/4 of California's population. Spain is just barely larger than California with 6 - 7 million more people. Right on down the list. Yet, the U.S. cannot act like a single entity anymore than Europe can, even with the E.U. In some respects, the U.S. has even greater restrictions than does the E.U.
In a sense, while each State has been allocated the power and authority to deal individually with a pandemic, they are still 'answerable' to a Federal Government, but more interdependent in the sense of mobility and less able to shut down State borders. Likewise, Americans have a Constitution which allows for more independence among the citizenry than many/most European countries and that Constitution, along with the various Constitutions of the States have restrictions on what Government, at all levels, can do, even in a pandemic. (This is particularly true if you want to compare it to China and their ability to, according to their media, 'control' the COVID virus.)
It's been clear from the beginning that Fauci has been unable to wrap his mind around the idea that he's NOT in charge of everything and everyone, for a variety of reasons. This latest statement indicates that he's unable to comprehend the U.S. as a variety of regions which are, in some respects, radically different based on physical geography, population, economics, etc. In some respects, it's precisely why there is no, single authority over everything and everyone and why we have a representative form of democracy rather than a 'pure' or direct democracy.
It's also why there is no one-size-fits-all, blanket policy that would have or will work. Not only can't the U.S. economy be completely shut down as a practical matter, I don't think it could be simultaneously shut down in that the U.S. States and their various districts wouldn't have it. It's something we saw, early on in the pandemic, here in California. The entirety of California refused to be shuttered simply because of the rise in cases in the Bay Area and Los Angeles. It's part of why even California gradually moved to a County by County approach, as screwy as that approach is.
The same applies here. You can't use a 'baseline' for the country as a whole and say... "See. I told you so. Now, if we'd just shut it all down..." But, that's exactly what Fauci is doing. It's why many have called for a more 'targeted' approach; both in terms of protecting portions of the population and based on regional numbers. Yet, as quoted from the article: "Fauci also said it boils down to semantics."
This is why you keep seeing him call for a national mask mandate, shutting 'everything' down, etc. He views the U.S. as a single entity rather than a grouping of unique regions. The problem is those unique attributes, in many ways, negate many of the 'advantages' of the approach he advocates, not to mention the ability to implement such an approach. While you may get certain population groups to adhere to universal mask mandates for a certain period of time, you will not get all of the population throughout the entire country to do so, even for a certain period of time.
Kinda like we've seen with South Dakota. Or... Maybe... Depending on your perspective... Along the lines of...
Proponents of shut it all down, have every manufacturer produce nothing but PPE, wear nothing but an N95 mask 24/7... pretty much see things as Fauci does; i.e., a perception which is inconsistent with why we are referred to as the United States and not, say... China. When you have absolute control, you have the ability to control things, more or less, absolutely. In the United States, we don't allow that, despite how we think of entities such as the IRS, the Supreme Court, the President, or the head of NIAID.
What I think is telling is the last section of the article...
At least she acknowledges that each region (at least if you view a "State" as a region) is unique and the overall numbers don't necessarily reflect that uniqueness. It's also critical to note that she's acknowledging, intentionally or not, that the blanket policies (and pronouncements) being pushed appear to be based on something other than actual science.
The U.S. is more like Europe as a whole than Europe as represented by viewing a series of independent countries. Sweden is slightly smaller than California with 1/4 of California's population. Spain is just barely larger than California with 6 - 7 million more people. Right on down the list. Yet, the U.S. cannot act like a single entity anymore than Europe can, even with the E.U. In some respects, the U.S. has even greater restrictions than does the E.U.
In a sense, while each State has been allocated the power and authority to deal individually with a pandemic, they are still 'answerable' to a Federal Government, but more interdependent in the sense of mobility and less able to shut down State borders. Likewise, Americans have a Constitution which allows for more independence among the citizenry than many/most European countries and that Constitution, along with the various Constitutions of the States have restrictions on what Government, at all levels, can do, even in a pandemic. (This is particularly true if you want to compare it to China and their ability to, according to their media, 'control' the COVID virus.)
It's been clear from the beginning that Fauci has been unable to wrap his mind around the idea that he's NOT in charge of everything and everyone, for a variety of reasons. This latest statement indicates that he's unable to comprehend the U.S. as a variety of regions which are, in some respects, radically different based on physical geography, population, economics, etc. In some respects, it's precisely why there is no, single authority over everything and everyone and why we have a representative form of democracy rather than a 'pure' or direct democracy.
It's also why there is no one-size-fits-all, blanket policy that would have or will work. Not only can't the U.S. economy be completely shut down as a practical matter, I don't think it could be simultaneously shut down in that the U.S. States and their various districts wouldn't have it. It's something we saw, early on in the pandemic, here in California. The entirety of California refused to be shuttered simply because of the rise in cases in the Bay Area and Los Angeles. It's part of why even California gradually moved to a County by County approach, as screwy as that approach is.
The same applies here. You can't use a 'baseline' for the country as a whole and say... "See. I told you so. Now, if we'd just shut it all down..." But, that's exactly what Fauci is doing. It's why many have called for a more 'targeted' approach; both in terms of protecting portions of the population and based on regional numbers. Yet, as quoted from the article: "Fauci also said it boils down to semantics."
This is why you keep seeing him call for a national mask mandate, shutting 'everything' down, etc. He views the U.S. as a single entity rather than a grouping of unique regions. The problem is those unique attributes, in many ways, negate many of the 'advantages' of the approach he advocates, not to mention the ability to implement such an approach. While you may get certain population groups to adhere to universal mask mandates for a certain period of time, you will not get all of the population throughout the entire country to do so, even for a certain period of time.
Kinda like we've seen with South Dakota. Or... Maybe... Depending on your perspective... Along the lines of...
Proponents of shut it all down, have every manufacturer produce nothing but PPE, wear nothing but an N95 mask 24/7... pretty much see things as Fauci does; i.e., a perception which is inconsistent with why we are referred to as the United States and not, say... China. When you have absolute control, you have the ability to control things, more or less, absolutely. In the United States, we don't allow that, despite how we think of entities such as the IRS, the Supreme Court, the President, or the head of NIAID.
What I think is telling is the last section of the article...
At least she acknowledges that each region (at least if you view a "State" as a region) is unique and the overall numbers don't necessarily reflect that uniqueness. It's also critical to note that she's acknowledging, intentionally or not, that the blanket policies (and pronouncements) being pushed appear to be based on something other than actual science.
Comment