While I’m on the subject, can someone please explain to me why the only alternatives being presented are complete freedom of movement from West African countries and completely banning all travel between the United States and West African countries? I mean other than it’s a lot easier to beat a straw man than have a fully-fleshed legitimate discussion?
If we’re going to take the position as we appear to be now that the way to deal with Ebola within the United States is by flying a squad of experts into wherever a case springs up and then airlifting the patient to one of the handful of places in the country equipt to deal with it, doesn’t putting some effort into managing the number of cases likely to travel to this country from West Africa sound prudent? Not completely eliminate, reduce to zero, etc. but control?
It’s that way because our elites are only capable of handling either/or choices. I’d make a crack about this proving they’be all been replaced by machines, but I know programming is capable of much more than simple either/or choices.
Really, it’s about either/or choices because it makes it easier for the elite tribes to argue with each other while keeping everyone else in the dark.
I pretty much agree with you except that the temperature screenings in place now don’t represent “complete freedom of movement.”
The question of course is whether or not that is efficacious. It may turn out that it keeps the number of infected people entering the Us low enough that the situation is manageable. Or that might turn out to not be the case. That doesn’t seem knowable to me, especially as the rate of infection in Africa is rising and the West is sending more aid workers.
Really, it’s about either/or choices because it makes it easier for the elite tribes to argue with each other while keeping everyone else in the dark.
Before Joe Gandelman let his blog get hijacked by rabid partisans, he used to write some good stuff. One phrase that stuck with me was his characterization of politicians from the two parties who rile up their bases in the manner of flim-flam men calling out, “Hey, let’s you and him fight!”
In that sense, it’s not even that they want to keep us in the dark while they argue about what to do….they are keeping people distracted while they do nothing of substance. The entire job of a politician now has become management of selective outrage.
“doesn’t putting some effort into managing the number of cases likely to travel to this country from West Africa sound prudent? Not completely eliminate, reduce to zero, etc. but control?”
As logical as that sounds, how much do you want to bet its out of fear of charges of bias, selective prevention and profiling.
1) We have almost no direct flights to West Africa. What you really want is to have other countries stop their flights. A number have already done that.
2) This will, if it has not already, self regulate. Know anyone planning to vacation in Liberia? I thought not. Almost all of the travel will self limit to that which is aid related.
3) This is subject to change. If one case every six months gets through, we are doing pretty well. If that changes, then we need to change our approach.
“As logical as that sounds, how much do you want to bet its out of fear of charges of bias, selective prevention and profiling.”
China, India, Russia, Singapore, etc. have not closed off travel. Is this because of worries about bias? As long as the public health guys think this is our best approach, I ma pretty good with what we are doing. I se no need to go with your politics driven preference.
Steve
China etc aren’t run by Barack Obama. See also Axelrods comments.
@Drew
As logical as that sounds, how much do you want to bet its out of fear of charges of bias, selective prevention and profiling.
Just because it sounds like a witch hunt, just because looks like a witch hunt, just because it will burn you at the stake like a witch hunt does not make it a witch hunt.
Just because something is true does not mean it is true. What kind of nonsense do they teach engineers?
The question really is, can you control a virulent virus by half measures, when you’ve never dealt with the virus before, and really don’t seem to have a handle on all the gaping holes of it’s transmission?
So far, our experiences with Ebola have only succeeded in showing how easy it is for mistakes to be made, how ignorant or nonplused the medical community, as a whole, seems to be in their protective protocols, and how slow and lame-brain the administration has been in getting competent hands around controlling the disease “potentially” spreading further, as well as the fear associated with it.
“China etc aren’t run by Barack Obama.”
No kidding. They have found a reason to not close off flights. You think the only reason Obama is not stopping flights is because of some bias or something, yet he is doing the same thing other major countries are doing. That suggests there are other reasons. Don’t they teach engineers logic?
Steve
No, they give them Ouija boards, but I’ll be damned if those boards didn’t predict calling terrorist acts workplace violence, war kinetic action and ragtag immigrants Dreamers.
I asked the board what the hell that meant and it started to smoke.