We have no national plan, different strategies by state, and free movement between the states, so why not? Just let the coronavirus rip. Keep your sensitive relatives indoors. As a hot state without much density or public transport, Texas will do better than most.https://twitter.com/KelemenCari/status/1248752893894811649 …
-
-
Replying to @Molson_Hart
You're covid takes range from super cautious to let it rip. Something's off.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gsvigruha
No no. I’m saying we should let it rip because no one wants to be cautious and implement a nationwide plan. If you don’t implement a nationwide plan, you might as well let it rip. You see what I’m saying? It’s like either close the door or open it. Don’t half open it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Molson_Hart
So your preferences/positions are in order of priorities: 1. Be super cautious at all levels (nation/state/individual) 2. Let it rip 3. Half ass measures combining the worst of both worlds Did i get it right?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @Molson_Hart
Yeah that makes more sense. Not sure i totally agree, i think half measures have some merit in this case (curve flattening and whatnot), but less clear trade-offs.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @gsvigruha
It all depends on the measures. Not all of this stuff is necessarily on a spectrum. The super cautious approach may be less bad economically than the half-assed approach. What I’m trying to say is that if we’re not going to be competent, let’s let it rip.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Molson_Hart @gsvigruha
For example, super cautious does not mean staying indoors for next 6 months. It means a proper national strategy that I laid out in that medium post. I’d we can’t get that, let’s just go for the let it rip strat because hard lockdown in 1 state and let it rip in another means
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Molson_Hart @gsvigruha
Hard lockdown was a waste in state 1. Cleared the now?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Molson_Hart
When i said less clear trade-offs what i meant is i don't think anyone can predict accurately the economic or health hazard consequences of 2 and 3, but we can predict for 1 somewhat better.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Agreed. The longer this goes though, the more we know. At the beginning we absolutely needed huge precautions. We didn’t know if the virus causes reinfections or major permanent damage for example. It increasingly seems like it does not now.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.