Some Thoughts

We’ve known almost from the time China admitted the contagion, only 15% of the US population would be at risk of severe complications from the Coronavirus. The rest will have, at worst, have the equivalent of a cold. Many, if not most, will hardly be affected. Importantly, those really at risk are, for the most part, easily identifiable. The medical community knows who is under cancer, diabetes, heart and kidney treatment, or anything else might compromise immune systems. We know exactly where all the nursing homes, assisted living, senior communities, and senior centers are located. Would it have been better to segregate and protect these communities, rather than disrupting the lives of the other 85% at an enormous cost? After all, the fear is our ICUs, and other medical facilities will be overwhelmed by a spike. The ones most likely needing hospital care are the at-risk group. A healthy 20-year-old isn’t going to tax the system. By making a massive targeted effort to slow down, the spread among the older and compromised population would’ve lessened a crunch and made it manageable.

Meanwhile, the rest go on as they would in a bad cold or flu season. It wouldn’t have been fun but might’ve been better than the total dislocation we’re experiencing. The virus would’ve spread rapidly throughout the younger and healthier population. However, the immunity that comes from once having it would also spread quickly, bringing an end to the epidemic. In this case, the old saying “time is money” is true to the tune of trillions. In this worldwide panic, it seems any cost-benefit analysis hasn’t even been considered.

Italy was slow to take action on movement to and from China, resulting in it being massively struck. Its single-payer health system fell behind and suffered the dreaded spike where it was overwhelmed, resulting in a high death count. Italy’s generally older population probably contributed, but that was a given. It will be interesting to see if the faster spread in that country leads to a swifter epidemic fade. If true, they might have a high death rate but a speedier return to normal. If this is the case, the idea of making every effort to protect the vulnerable while leaving the virus to run its course through the younger, generally healthy public was worthwhile. We didn’t do this. Older people are just now getting help with things such as food delivery and shopping priority at stores while they shelter in place. Segregating this population from the mass population requires reliable support these vulnerable groups are just now getting. While data from China and South Korea, among others, pointed out where the real mortal danger was. There was a bureaucratic failure of the CDC and the FDA to enlist all private government sources in widespread testing. This deprived us of knowing who needed to be kept away from the vulnerable and visa versa. Still, we knew enough to require protective garb for those serving nursing homes and assisted living and other identifiable at-risk people. Maybe an earlier bullet rather than a belated shotgun blast was the way to go. Unfortunately, this just isn’t in the bureaucratic DNA.

Amid all this turmoil, this remains an election year. The Democrats have concluded Bernie Sanders accomplished his task of moving the party to the far left. He and his election losing socialist label now can be safely dumped. Unfortunately, the only alternative they had left was good old Uncle Doofus, aka Joe Biden. Joe seemingly has a clear path to the nomination. It has been pointed out our prediction of a hung convention giving the nod to Michelle Obama is a dead letter. We beg to differ. No matter what closet they hide good old Joe in, he still has seven months to be Joe. Does anyone really think he can go that long without a significant gaff or worse a defining senior moment?

The Democrats didn’t get rid of Bernie only to nominate another undetectable. Joe has always been a walking gaffe machine. However, his ugly attack on a gun-owning voter just asking a pointed question appeared to indicate something else. It looked like the actions we’ve seen in older friends and loved ones. Angry uncalled for outbursts more often than not accompany the onset of some form of dementia. If we saw it that way, others also see it. Can the Democrats take that risk? Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York apparently doesn’t think so. How else do you explain his almost endless daily coronavirus news conferences? No other Governor even comes close to his TV time. He is running for something, and unless he gets a quick sex change operation, it isn’t Vice-president. If he sees an opening due to a medical drop out(or push out) ending Joe’s run, party movers and shakers also see it. Joe leaves before the convention, leaving it wide open. In that case, Michelle is a much better spot than Andrew or anyone else. Place your bets.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s