Mask science deniers

[albert648]

Originally Posted by Westerner92

In 2020, the feds weren't doing anything to help the supply chains. The situation got bad enough that some state governors went around the feds and imported PPE equipment from South Korea and other countries just so the healthcare workers could have enough supplies. I suppose you don't remember that.

Meaning lots of feds weren't doing their jobs and heads need to roll. And some state governors also weren't doing their jobs and heads need to roll.

Originally Posted by Westerner92

Near-universal cooperation is how human societies work unless they're in decline. Codependence and cooperation is the only way humans have been able to exist, whether in hunter-gatherer societies or modern civilization. Much of American society has indeed become so individualistic that it's breaking down the trust necessary to maintain First World standards of living.

I have nowhere near the influence needed to elicit such cooperation, so I'm going to take measures to protect myself first. As a matter of expedience. Like I said, that's the path of least resistance. It has the greatest impact on my safety for the least effort. That near-universal cooperation is on the government to elicit from the people, and, as usual, they burned their pants let alone put them on.

Originally Posted by Westerner92

That's only feasible if there are waterproof pants are being produced by the supply chains you're dependent on. The supply chains are especially vulnerable because people keep peeing on each other as some sort of adolescent attempt to stick it to the man.

Which is why I buy spare waterproof pants while I can still find them. I have no control over global supply chains, there's literally nothing I can do to have a material impact on that if they fall apart. What I can control, however, is what's in my closet.

[Westerner92]

Originally Posted by albert648

Meaning lots of feds weren't doing their jobs and heads need to roll. And some state governors also weren't doing their jobs and heads need to roll.



I have nowhere near the influence needed to elicit such cooperation, so I'm going to take measures to protect myself first. As a matter of expedience. Like I said, that's the path of least resistance. It has the greatest impact on my safety for the least effort. That near-universal cooperation is on the government to elicit from the people, and, as usual, they burned their pants let alone put them on.

So just to recap my understanding, you think the CDC was wrong to push for marginal gains and mutual cooperation when supply chains were predictably overwhelmed, facilitated in large part by an incompetent administration, because you tend to cynically capitulate to the segment of society that’s caught up in an increasingly self-destructive culture?

Which is why I buy spare waterproof pants while I can still find them. I have no control over global supply chains, there's literally nothing I can do to have a material impact on that if they fall apart. What I can control, however, is what's in my closet.

This mindset tends to exacerbate hoarding panics, leading to even further issues.

Life isn’t about what you control, it’s about what you contribute.

[albert648]

Originally Posted by Westerner92

So just to recap my understanding, you think the CDC was wrong to push for marginal gains and mutual cooperation when supply chains were predictably overwhelmed, facilitated in large part by an incompetent administration, because you tend to cynically capitulate to the segment of society that’s caught up in an increasingly self-destructive culture?

Surely the people in high places in the Federal Government knew that better than you or I and maybe they would have done better if they were more realistic in eliciting the desired behavior. Outcomes will decide if CDC was wrong to do that, but how they did it was a disaster frankly.

As far as capitulation goes, I'm ruthlessly realistic/efficient in my decisionmaking. I do what I can and give up on what I can't without a second thought.

Originally Posted by Westerner92

This mindset tends to exacerbate hoarding panics, leading to even further issues.

The quantities I purchase do no such thing. I'm not going into stores and clearing shelves. The fragility of the global supply chain is not something I can make a material difference in. My own health and well being is. Do what I can, forget what I can't. If the feds aren't stockpiling right now, someone needs to lose their job.

Originally Posted by Westerner92

Life isn’t about what you control, it’s about what you contribute.

That's lovely. But push comes to shove, and we were well past shove in those times, my own health and well-being comes first. Even the airlines tell you to put your own oxygen mask on first before helping others with theirs. Can't help anyone else if I'm not in a position to help myself.

[ncole1]

Masks can provide some amount of protection. I don't object to masks on principle, but I do object to the hypocrisy of people who want to impose them on others while also promoting maskless behavior in other settings. For example, indoor dining at full capacity but not being able to go to a grocery store maskless. It makes no sense because you can't wear a mask when you're eating. Thus, it cannot be any safer to dine in a restaurant than to go shopping maskless. If the government is going to allow something "to support business", the they should also allow it for other reasons (comfort, free expression, etc.)

[Westerner92]

Originally Posted by albert648

Surely the people in high places in the Federal Government knew that better than you or I and maybe they would have done better if they were more realistic in eliciting the desired behavior. Outcomes will decide if CDC was wrong to do that, but how they did it was a disaster frankly.

I guess what I’m getting at is that it seems like you’re levying criticism against an agency making reasonable recommendations rather than recognizing the slack-jawed incompetence of the executive leadership and its voter base.