Resist The Authoritarian Response To The Coronavirus

[Antonio the Sixth]

I really, really, really hate both sides of this "argument".

On one side, you have babies whining and moaning about any minor little inconvenience to their daily lives and acting like it's the end of freedom or something. On the other side you have psychopaths who think any social problem can only be dealt with the subtlety and compassion of a 1920s eugenicist.

It's really not that f**king hard. Exceptional circumstances can warrant temporary restrictions on liberty, as long as those are decided through legal and democratic means, but each such restriction needs to be weighed carefully and never violate fundamental human rights. We can quibble over where to draw the line, but let's at least acknowledge it's not a binary.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Uh, well, no, if it's illegal for DeWine to postpone elections then he obviously shouldn't do so. I'm not aware of the details here, but the obvious think to do should have been to call in a special session of the legislature and let them draft emergency legislation to that effect.

As for the shelter in place order, again, I can't comment on the legality of it, and no, obviously it can't last forever, but if the pandemic really gets out in full swing then it might genuinely be the only way to save lives. Just ask Italy.

Of course, the elephant in the room of this discussion is that the government should be pumping massive amounts of cash into the economy (ideally directly into the pockets of consumers) to sustain the economic damage that the cessation of economic activity will cause, and especially to support the millions of people who aren't able to go to work anymore. Of course it won't do that, because it's against the neoliberal dogma.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Of course, the elephant in the room of this discussion is that the government should be pumping massive amounts of cash into the economy (ideally directly into the pockets of consumers) to sustain the economic damage that the cessation of economic activity will cause, and especially to support the millions of people who aren't able to go to work anymore. Of course it won't do that, because it's against the neoliberal dogma.

Economic advisor: "Mr. President, Leader McConnell, I PROMISE you that the recommended guidelines for economic stability under market-crashing health emergencies is to implement socialism. You need to give poor people free money NOW!"

Poor b__tard will probably end in Guantanamo for saying that

This isn't even socialism, it's run-of-the-mill Keynesianism.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Of course, the elephant in the room of this discussion is that the government should be pumping massive amounts of cash into the economy (ideally directly into the pockets of consumers) to sustain the economic damage that the cessation of economic activity will cause, and especially to support the millions of people who aren't able to go to work anymore. Of course it won't do that, because it's against the neoliberal dogma.

Economic advisor: "Mr. President, Leader McConnell, I PROMISE you that the recommended guidelines for economic stability under market-crashing health emergencies is to implement socialism. You need to give poor people free money NOW!"

Poor b__tard will probably end in Guantanamo for saying that

This isn't even socialism, it's run-of-the-mill Keynesianism.

Do you think Trump will understand the difference?

No. I wanted to make sure you did.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Nobody is seriously talking about a 18-month lockdown. That would obviously be unenforceable as well as being, yes, more economically ruinous than our society can reasonably afford.

The virus will probably stay with us for 18 months or longer, but what we're trying to do here is get through the peak of the infection, and do so gradually enough that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. There are many estimates of how long that will take, but to my knowledge it shouldn't be more than a couple months.

However, for it to actually work, we need to go on lockdown right now. This means people need to quit being babies or LARPing as brave rebels, suck it up, and stay home for a few months. It also means the state should provide immediate economic relief to everyone who needs it. If we're actually serious enough to do this thing, we'll be able to go back to our daily lives soon and minimize deaths as much as possible. If not, then whatever happens next is something we'll have brought onto ourselves.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Nobody is seriously talking about a 18-month lockdown. That would obviously be unenforceable as well as being, yes, more economically ruinous than our society can reasonably afford.

The virus will probably stay with us for 18 months or longer, but what we're trying to do here is get through the peak of the infection, and do so gradually enough that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. There are many estimates of how long that will take, but to my knowledge it shouldn't be more than a couple months.

However, for it to actually work, we need to go on lockdown right now. This means people need to quit being babies or LARPing as brave rebels, suck it up, and stay home for a few months. It also means the state should provide immediate economic relief to everyone who needs it. If we're actually serious enough to do this thing, we'll be able to go back to our daily lives soon and minimize deaths as much as possible. If not, then whatever happens next is something we'll have brought onto ourselves.

“Stay home for a few months”.

Really, really privileged quote there Anthony.  People CANNOT stay home for a few months.  They will die,  in far far greater numbers than you can ever imagine.  We will have mass starvation and civil unrest.  You may be able to stay home for a few months, and good for you.  By all means do so if you feel it necessary.

It takes a whole new level of intellectual dishonesty to quote a sentence verbatim while ignoring the sentence that came immediately after. You must be very proud of yourself. You sure showed me! Any rational person will obviously see through your little parlor trick, but I'm sure it won't stop your coterie of rebel LARPers to applaud you.

That aside, you're probably right that Americans lack the basic self-discipline to follow the common sense measures needed to avoid making the situation a lot worse. Even Europeans, who are generally more down-to-earth, don't seem to be doing a good job of it. And yes, the lack of economic relief coming from the US government will probably mean that many people will be forced to keep going to work (even when a humane society would be helping them to stay home). This, of course, will all make life worse for everyone in the end. But I guess there's no other way when the country is full of people like you.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Nobody is seriously talking about a 18-month lockdown. That would obviously be unenforceable as well as being, yes, more economically ruinous than our society can reasonably afford.

The virus will probably stay with us for 18 months or longer, but what we're trying to do here is get through the peak of the infection, and do so gradually enough that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. There are many estimates of how long that will take, but to my knowledge it shouldn't be more than a couple months.

However, for it to actually work, we need to go on lockdown right now. This means people need to quit being babies or LARPing as brave rebels, suck it up, and stay home for a few months. It also means the state should provide immediate economic relief to everyone who needs it. If we're actually serious enough to do this thing, we'll be able to go back to our daily lives soon and minimize deaths as much as possible. If not, then whatever happens next is something we'll have brought onto ourselves.

“Stay home for a few months”.

Really, really privileged quote there Anthony.  People CANNOT stay home for a few months.  They will die,  in far far greater numbers than you can ever imagine.  We will have mass starvation and civil unrest.  You may be able to stay home for a few months, and good for you.  By all means do so if you feel it necessary.

It takes a whole new level of intellectual dishonesty to quote a sentence verbatim while ignoring the sentence that came immediately after. You must be very proud of yourself. You sure showed me! Any rational person will obviously see through your little parlor trick, but I'm sure it won't stop your coterie of rebel LARPers to applaud you.

That aside, you're probably right that Americans lack the basic self-discipline to follow the common sense measures needed to avoid making the situation a lot worse. Even Europeans, who are generally more down-to-earth, don't seem to be doing a good job of it. And yes, the lack of economic relief coming from the US government will probably mean that many people will be forced to keep going to work (even when a humane society would be helping them to stay home). This, of course, will all make life worse for everyone in the end. But I guess there's no other way when the country is full of people like you.

Your next sentence doesn’t even nearly cover it, sorry.  The state can’t cover for that kind of economic fallout.  That’s why I didn’t address it, it was nonsensical.  Try harder to think of a way to save the American worker, instead of just talking down to them.  We need to come together.

The state can absolutely cover 2-3 months of wage loss for workers who need it. It's really not rocket science. Worse come to worse, it blows up the deficit. Big deal. You can always make it up by raising taxes after the recovery, or better yet, just print money, since inflation is going to be anemic anyway.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Nobody is seriously talking about a 18-month lockdown. That would obviously be unenforceable as well as being, yes, more economically ruinous than our society can reasonably afford.

The virus will probably stay with us for 18 months or longer, but what we're trying to do here is get through the peak of the infection, and do so gradually enough that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. There are many estimates of how long that will take, but to my knowledge it shouldn't be more than a couple months.

However, for it to actually work, we need to go on lockdown right now. This means people need to quit being babies or LARPing as brave rebels, suck it up, and stay home for a few months. It also means the state should provide immediate economic relief to everyone who needs it. If we're actually serious enough to do this thing, we'll be able to go back to our daily lives soon and minimize deaths as much as possible. If not, then whatever happens next is something we'll have brought onto ourselves.

“Stay home for a few months”.

Really, really privileged quote there Anthony.  People CANNOT stay home for a few months.  They will die,  in far far greater numbers than you can ever imagine.  We will have mass starvation and civil unrest.  You may be able to stay home for a few months, and good for you.  By all means do so if you feel it necessary.

It takes a whole new level of intellectual dishonesty to quote a sentence verbatim while ignoring the sentence that came immediately after. You must be very proud of yourself. You sure showed me! Any rational person will obviously see through your little parlor trick, but I'm sure it won't stop your coterie of rebel LARPers to applaud you.

That aside, you're probably right that Americans lack the basic self-discipline to follow the common sense measures needed to avoid making the situation a lot worse. Even Europeans, who are generally more down-to-earth, don't seem to be doing a good job of it. And yes, the lack of economic relief coming from the US government will probably mean that many people will be forced to keep going to work (even when a humane society would be helping them to stay home). This, of course, will all make life worse for everyone in the end. But I guess there's no other way when the country is full of people like you.

Your next sentence doesn’t even nearly cover it, sorry.  The state can’t cover for that kind of economic fallout.  That’s why I didn’t address it, it was nonsensical.  Try harder to think of a way to save the American worker, instead of just talking down to them.  We need to come together.

The state can absolutely cover 2-3 months of wage loss for workers who need it. It's really not rocket science. Worse come to worse, it blows up the deficit. Big deal. You can always make it up by raising taxes after the recovery, or better yet, just print money, since inflation is going to be anemic anyway.

Most small businesses can’t close down for 2-3 months.  There won’t be jobs to come back to when its over.  I think you just see an opportunity to turn this into your socialist playground.  I don’t blame you.  I would do the same if I could.

But I digress, hopefully we won’t have to take these steps.

Guess what, genius, those small businesses can be bailed out exactly the same way workers can. I know you're one of those neoliberal fanatics who has a principled stance against using government money to help people, but most real people don't want to let your bullsh*t ideology get in the way of their livelihoods.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Nobody is seriously talking about a 18-month lockdown. That would obviously be unenforceable as well as being, yes, more economically ruinous than our society can reasonably afford.

The virus will probably stay with us for 18 months or longer, but what we're trying to do here is get through the peak of the infection, and do so gradually enough that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. There are many estimates of how long that will take, but to my knowledge it shouldn't be more than a couple months.

However, for it to actually work, we need to go on lockdown right now. This means people need to quit being babies or LARPing as brave rebels, suck it up, and stay home for a few months. It also means the state should provide immediate economic relief to everyone who needs it. If we're actually serious enough to do this thing, we'll be able to go back to our daily lives soon and minimize deaths as much as possible. If not, then whatever happens next is something we'll have brought onto ourselves.

“Stay home for a few months”.

Really, really privileged quote there Anthony.  People CANNOT stay home for a few months.  They will die,  in far far greater numbers than you can ever imagine.  We will have mass starvation and civil unrest.  You may be able to stay home for a few months, and good for you.  By all means do so if you feel it necessary.

It takes a whole new level of intellectual dishonesty to quote a sentence verbatim while ignoring the sentence that came immediately after. You must be very proud of yourself. You sure showed me! Any rational person will obviously see through your little parlor trick, but I'm sure it won't stop your coterie of rebel LARPers to applaud you.

That aside, you're probably right that Americans lack the basic self-discipline to follow the common sense measures needed to avoid making the situation a lot worse. Even Europeans, who are generally more down-to-earth, don't seem to be doing a good job of it. And yes, the lack of economic relief coming from the US government will probably mean that many people will be forced to keep going to work (even when a humane society would be helping them to stay home). This, of course, will all make life worse for everyone in the end. But I guess there's no other way when the country is full of people like you.

Your next sentence doesn’t even nearly cover it, sorry.  The state can’t cover for that kind of economic fallout.  That’s why I didn’t address it, it was nonsensical.  Try harder to think of a way to save the American worker, instead of just talking down to them.  We need to come together.

The state can absolutely cover 2-3 months of wage loss for workers who need it. It's really not rocket science. Worse come to worse, it blows up the deficit. Big deal. You can always make it up by raising taxes after the recovery, or better yet, just print money, since inflation is going to be anemic anyway.

Most small businesses can’t close down for 2-3 months.  There won’t be jobs to come back to when its over.  I think you just see an opportunity to turn this into your socialist playground.  I don’t blame you.  I would do the same if I could.

But I digress, hopefully we won’t have to take these steps.

Guess what, genius, those small businesses can be bailed out exactly the same way workers can. I know you're one of those neoliberal fanatics who has a principled stance against using government money to help people, but most real people don't want to let your bullsh*t ideology get in the way of their livelihoods.

Whats with the attitude Im getting.

Can we at least have elections before the government takes over the whole economy?  Or does that not fit into the plan to seize everything.

Thanks for showing your true colors as an ideologue who'd happily sacrifice other people's lives because something something muh soshulizm. Clearly there's no point in arguing with you anymore since we simply have different moral priorities.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Oh I should say, at risk of being misinterpeted, that we absolutely should have a ban on social gatherings at a minimum. Watching Italy from this side of the pond does not look like a fun place to be in a week. It's not very fun at home either, but we kinda have to do this. Three weeks ago things looked a lot different, but it's almost undeniable now the situation is far more dire than at least I had presumed. The way I see it, the better we are at following the smaller rules like social distancing the less likely we are to face a true lockdown. And I really don't want that.

The US has already reached the point that Italy was at when it went on lockdown. If social distancing had been properly enforced three weeks ago, then it might have been enough, but now it sadly probably won't be. I really, really hope I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure a proper lockdown is coming, at least in high-density areas.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Ironically we're in this mess because the very authoritarian Chinese government covered up the initial outbreak.

That's very true as well, and something that should not be forgotten in all this. Transparency is also key in emergencies, and that's something democracies are immeasurably better at.