[lawprofessor]

Interesting topic for me as well.

I find the anti-intellectual thinking that seems to have enamored a vocal percentage of this country to be unbelievable.  It's a dumbing down of the people, along the lines of bread and circuses for the masses. 

Yes, everyone has a right to hold an opinion on a topic.  However, not all opinions are based on the same level of knowledge so the opinions are not equal in facts or relevance to the situation.

One can reads articles on a topic but that doesn't mean one is an expert.  There is a reason higher education is required to practice in areas requiring expertise and knowledge.

To weight an uneducated opinion as equivalent to an educated opinion is hubris, not intellect. As well it's missing an opportunity to learn.  An intelligent person exercising critical thinking skills, hopefully, realizes it is smarter to make use of others skills to learn and make informed decisions than it is to speak and confirm ones lack of intelligence.

From my perspective, this circus going on in this country engenders nothing even close to confidence.  The political partisanship and theatrics are nothing more than bread and circuses for the masses to keep them amused and compliant.

This has born a generation of selfish brats who make no sacrifices for their country.  Instead they want to whine and rail about their rights being infringed upon, failing to realize those people who fought for their rights and pay for the roof over their heads and the food in their mouths are the same ones they are hurting. 

Yet, these people are the same ones who when hurt look for someone else to blame.  The same who want the government to pay for their student loans.  The same who prattle on about how tough life is when they are expected to go to work.  The same who want $15 to serve fast food.  And interestingly, on the other end of the political spectrum, the same who preach self reliance and Christian values while asserting they have a say in how another addresses health concerns.  Yet they feel put upon when the government, in a pandemic, legislates health concerns and behaviors of its citizens. 

Hyprocrisy at its best. 

This is the same mentality that grew a generation of MLCers who don't know who they are, or how to act as adults.  Who are behaving as roll models to their children that all that matters is what they want, what their opinion is, what makes them happy no matter who else is hurt, who have expectations that just showing up makes them equal to those that put in effort to learn and achieve, who run home to mommy and or daddy when going gets tough instead of putting in work, who see no need to own responsibility for their actions because nothing is their fault, who feel their opinions are as equally valid as anyone elses even those who have spent a lifetime studying and working in complex fields.  Unbelievable and pathetic.

And it spawned a generation of us, the LBS'S.  What do we think we are modeling for our children?  Hopefully, it is not how to accept less than what we should deserve or have earned. 

Trust?  Not even close based on the actions of this administration.  Respect?  Again, not even close, as it's done nothing to EARN or DESERVE the respect.  Political partisianship, deflecting blame to previous administrations, name calling, smart assed comments in the middle of speeches, none of that shows strength. The theatrics are pathetic and childish. 

And I never liked bread nor circuses.

Lp

[Finding Joy]

Law professor, I find this quite rude and condescending.  This is new.  All of the facts are not yet in play.  You my friend are not a scientist either.  You are just a well educated lawyer that believes your opinion is more important than someone else’s.

We all do our research and come to our best conclusions.  We read articles from scientists, and people who are familiar with the topic.  We watch the news, we weed out what we think is untrue/true and make our best guess on the truth.  No one has all of the facts yet, so even the scientists are limited with data. 

A little humility goes a long way.

By the way, there is such a thing as being concerned about all three things.  The virus, the economy and our constitutional rights.  Many want to make this simple, however it is quite complex.

I am currently watching my elderly grandparents struggle to keep their business open.  They were not forced shut, but rather their employees would rather take the handout the government is giving than work.  So they themselves are exposed.

All of the people I know screaming for their constitutional rights own businesses and don’t want them to go under. 

The ones wanting their loans paid off are already getting unemployment.... 

I did not reply to a prior comment of yours because we were asked not to make this political.  You however continue to do so.

[Finding Joy]

I completely agree about having to trust our own instincts and intuition because the trust factor is not there.  We are following all of the rules and I personally don’t mind quarantine. 

However, I do believe a balance has to take place.  Letting people’s lively hoods  be taken away completely and many having to rely on the government is not the American way.  A balance for our constitutional rights, our ability to provide for ourselves and the public health must take place. 

Many want to make those concerned about anything but the virus out to be uneducated idiots who shouldn’t have an opinion. 

The truth is, everyone I know is more concerned about paying their bills than catching the virus.  We are concerned about our rights because more of them erode with each passing year, and seldom are they returned.  We are concerned about the virus, but many feel the ends do not justify the means.  Many feel the measures have gone too far in certain parts of the country.  Where I live it seems reasonable, certain states have gone too far and so many have raised a voice to say, no.

[lawprofessor]

Finding Joy,

1.  Nowhere did I say those concerned were uneducated idiots.  I said the tone of anti-intellectualism is unbelievable.  Not at all the same thing.

2.  I never claimed to be a scientist.  I said weighting an uneducated opinion the same as a specialist in a particular field is hubris, not intellect.  Again, not the same.  For example, I do not second guess or claim to have a more valid opinion than my mechanic.  I am perfectly capable of reading articles and specs and forming an opinion as to what's wrong with my car but I respect his education, skill, and expertise because he has a greater amount of knowledge and answers questions with directness and honesty. 

3.  Yet again, I did not say ANYWHERE that my opinion mattered more than anyone elses opinion.  That is a ridiculous and untrue statement you made.

4.  And yet again, I did not identify party affiliation, nor complain about one party or another. I took issue with a school of thought based on the discussion of trusted organizations.

5.  If you disagree with my opinion or find it rude and or condescending, at least address points rather than react stating things you read into it rather than what is actually written.

6.  I have 2 businesses of my own that im watching stagger towards bankruptcy, that I alone will be responsible for the bills/expenses.  My J is about to be laid off.  Yet, I am not asking for help or blaming others.  I will rebuild just as I built the businesses in the first place, nor am I suggesting that my right to make money is of equal importance to someone's health or life.  Yes, one can be concerned with all 3 aspects you listed.  But when I have to tell a family member their spouse is dying, I'm not concerned or focusing on my right to make money or go to the gym.  I'm focusing on the of a fellow human being.

7.  I am receiving no unemployment and would love my loans paid off although what that has to do with the points I made escapes me. J's unemployment is less than 50% of his earnings so I'll be paying his bills as well as my own.  Why?  Because he's being laid off due to the federal government failing to pay for contracts to his company to date.

8.   "Their employees would rather take the handout the government is giving than work.  So they themselves are exposed.". Are you sure they would rather take a hand out than work?  Perhaps the employees don't want to get sick? Perhaps they have children at home?  Perhaps like many of us, in addition to children, they are caregivers for elderly parents?  After all if they wanted a hand out its simple enough to get one even without Covid-19 factored in so why would they be working in the first place?  A bit of self exposure there, assuming the motives of employees? 

9.  I am not making this political.  If that's what you want to read into it, that's your issue, not my concern.  But at least try to read content, not react to perception. 

Yes, this is new, a new situation, a new virus.  The behaviors in question are not new, however, and that is what was addressed in relation to trust of an organization. 

It was Ronald Reagan who, at a dinner speech I attended, addressed the constant barbs he was receiving about being an actor rather than an intellectual.  To paraphrase, he responded, I may not be the smartest man in the room, but I'm smart enough to have hired some really smart men and I'm smart enough to listen to them.  And I'm just smart enough to present my decisions to the American people.  I don't have to stoop to name calling or blame.  It's my Presidency and the American people deserve my best." People respected his honesty, his class, his dignity, and his owning his mistakes even if they didn't always agree with him.  He was trusted for those qualities.  That is real leadership.  You are, of course, free to disagree. 

There is no disagreement that a balance must be struck.  I simply don't think a balance can be struck until true leadership is shown without blaming the past, without politicizing issues, without barbed comments and half truths, and without theater.

What rights are you feeling erode to a greater extent year after year?  I guess I'm not noting an erosion of my personal rights as delineated in the Constitution nor have I been presented with more cases arguing that Constitutional issue.  Have some states gone to far at the state level?, most assuredly, for my personal taste, but that's a state not a Federal Constitutional issue and for the voters of that state to address. 

Lp

[Finding Joy]

There is quite a bit there law professor.  I spoke to a perceived tone.  If that tone is not there, forgive me.  Sometimes we read into written text and it is not as well rounded as the spoken language.  All of this is raw as I watch those I love struggle.

I am sorry your businesses are struggling.  My parents had to lay off their staff and my grandparents employees stopped coming in.  My grandparents don’t have a choice but to risk exposure to save their business.  My tenants are layed off too and struggling.  The point is, the balance has not been struck with the virus and people’s livelihoods.

I love Ronald Reagan and he did take ownership and was an awesome leader!  I do agree ownership is important, however our leadership has done a good job in other ways.  For instance, I believe in the policies in place and in the slow reopening.

You have made it very clear you are not a fan of the current leadership, there was no need to name names.

As far as rights eroding, Freedom of Religion is under attack and has been for many years.  This next election will be watched closely.

Of course none of our opinions are weighted the same as a scientist in the field.  However, we all have access to the information at hand.

The scientists only speak to what’s best for getting rid of the  virus.  The economy is not something they will speak to.  Our rights are not something they will speak to.  So what I am saying is that just because they say it, does not mean even they have the full picture.  The leaders have to look at all of these things and make choices based on not just the scientific opinions, but economic and constitutional rights.

Have a good evening Law!

Also, many of us do question where this virus came from.  Even if it was an accident as they say, never waste a good emergency.  This is being used to reshape our country.  To make it much more dependent on the government.  It is America’s distrust in government that has kept it free for this long.  My distrust is strong and healthy.  I don’t want the government running our lives. 

[lawprofessor]

I think we are all a bit raw.  For me, this comes as anger and frustration.  And I'm sorry if I sounded rude or condescending.

All you said I can agree with.  And there in lies my struggle.  I loved Trump's comments today about moving supply chains home.  I love his focus on unfair trade practices.  I agree with most of his policies as to foreign affairs generally although for personal reasons I find his relationship status with Putin a bit worrisome as I know what that man is about.  I would love to see the balance with opening small stores since the mega stores are open.  I like his policies dealing with Ranching and Farming.  I like his position on tax law. 

And yet I struggle with the general concept of blaming the past, of not focusing on the today and the future, of lack of accountability and ownership, of tweets full of barbs that diminish the man, detract from his successes, and the exalted office.  Sometimes he is his own worst enemy in my view.  And that frustrates me because it's quite unnecessary.

Freedom of religion is one area that has swung too far one way certainly. I cannot square the Constitutional history of the Founders and their experiences with many of the state policies in place although that doesn't come up in court as often here as other states I've lived in. 

Where the virus came from, tied with the lack of Chinese transparency has raised some big questions.  I'm not sure we will ever know the full truth.  And that ties back into the idea of trust in organizations.  I'm still stuck on the old time Republican party Reagan era common sense of trust but verify.  Speak hard truths without embellishments, mean what one says and take responsibility.  Perhaps I'm showing my age? 

And that was the hardest part of my ex's MLC, the lies, the embellishments, the failure to take responsibility and own wrongs, the behaviour that failed to be respectable and strong, from a man who proudly wore the uniform of a Marine for over a decade.  So I'm particularly sensitive to that still after all these years. 

Good night,
Lp

[marvin4242]

FJ: I don’t want to devolve and take off track, but I am very curious which constitutional rights exactly are you referring to? The right of assembly? Because I have not seen anyone being dragged off to jail in these incredibly ill advised “demonstrations” with guns. You think it is a violation of constitutional rights to advise people NOT to spread a virus? Is this colored by your belief that this is not that big a deal? What would you say if this was a virulent disease with 100% mortality rate spread by simple contact? Would you still think rights are being violated? What would you say if someone who was ill decided to “assemble” somewhere where your children are and put their lives at risk? Would you support their right? I am not being argumentative, I am trying to point out that there are real lives being put in danger by these idiotic pointless demonstrations. They don’t happen to be of people you may care about.

By contrast there was a large demonstration last night in Israel against the PM. The amazing picture (look it up) showed people demonstrating while wearing masks and keeping a large distance between themselves. So the right to demonstrate isn’t the issue, its the reckless and selfish behaviour of not keeping social distance, and in one instance blocking access to a hospital that is wrong.

As for the economy: what is the cost that you believe is an acceptable number of deaths? Because this exact question is what IS being studied by economists. When I talk about expertise it is not just sciences, there are many fields of knowledge. When the President tried to get businesses and banker and investors to back opening everything up now they said no. I don’t believe they said it from an epidemiological viewpoint. They have probably run cost/benefit analysis of what would happen if they open now and there is a second wave, fatalities, more damage to economy, vs taking a little bit more hit and open later as epidemiologists suggest. Did you see that report? So what makes you think a group of people who are really not educated or knowledgeable of these trade offs are better suited to force a reopening?

As for the economic damage: yes absolutely. It is VERY real. I happen to run businesses where I can afford to not let any of my employees take any financial hit. I am very happy about that. But this is NOT the case for a lot of business owners. And the reason this is such a big issue is exactly because our governmental policies are so far behind other countries. This is NOT a political discussion, I have no interest in such a thing anymore in the US. This is an analysis of policy and how we are failing.

For example European countries have guaranteed DIRECTLY the wages of workers, here in the UK its 80% for the duration of lockdown, up to a limit that covers all of middle class earners. This means that while people are doing what’s best for themselves and societies they are not being financially ruined. In the US we sent a negligible $1300 check that we have failed to get out to everyone, and the Payroll Protection Program (which by the way could have been the same idea) has been botched terribly. How? Because instead of directly allowing the government to provide funds to retain employees it is being run through banks. The banks get to decide. So ironically small businesses without “premium” access haven’t even been able to file a loan application while bigger businesses have been funded. Then the money ran out. I know many very small business owners who’s banks were crushed by the applications and other banks would not let them open new accounts and file. Guess what happened with businesses that have a lot more assets and money in the bank? You guessed it, the bank pushed through their applications first.

As for other parts of the program people have to file for unemployment in their state first. And you guessed it, these programs are completely not able to keep up and in bigger states may take weeks to just process. Not only this is resulting in a lot of small businesses and people truly having to struggle.  Other countries put in place mortgage and rent holds, while in the US people are being evicted. Once homeless, recovery is near impossible. By halting mortgages and rents both property owners who rely on rent and the rent payers are protected while we freeze the economy in order to save lives.

Note how there are ways to do both things while minimizing financial damage to people. And that is not all. Economies that are protecting the financial well being of their citizens and businesses will RECOVER much faster when the shut down is eased. Because both their consumer and their businesses won’t be financially as damaged, while US will have to start rebuilding businesses and people will have to start digging out of financial holes. None of this is political. This is economic planning and expert advice. I am sorry but instincts are not how to run major companies much less countries. Imagine if our military ran strategy, planning and wars by “instinct.”

Western and other societies have amassed incredible amount of knowledge for many years. That is part of why we all enjoy such a high quality of life. And for many years US was the leader of this kind of pragmatic, knowledge based operations and that was what made us a world leader. But that is not what is happening right now. And from everything I see a great deal of our current policies help the well off at the expense of the working and middle class. And forgetting politics or beliefs no country does well for itself and its citizens without promoting and protecting a large, healthy and financially secure middle class. We have seen over and over how economies and societies suffer when wealth starts drifting ever upwards.

[Nerissa]

Note how there are ways to do both things while minimizing financial damage to people. And that is not all. Economies that are protecting the financial well being of their citizens and businesses will RECOVER much faster when the shut down is eased. Because both their consumer and their businesses won’t be financially as damaged, while US will have to start rebuilding businesses and people will have to start digging out of financial holes. None of this is political. This is economic planning and expert advice. I am sorry but instincts are not how to run major companies much less countries. Imagine if our military ran strategy, planning and wars by “instinct.”

Is instinct in this case largely a euphemism for self interest?

Surely the most important constitutional right is to live - to be alive? Isn’t opening up going to deny many that right?
And regarding business, I have no knowledge of economics, but is it lockdown that is affecting business or the virus?  Opening up allows the virus to spread rampantly.  What is sickness  going to do to businesses?  Are people going to start life as normal once distancing ends?  I shan’t.  My activities will be curtailed for some time while we see what happens.  I know a number of people who have had the virus and are better and only elderly people who have died, but one friend has been ventilated and is now home recuperating.  He is 54 , active and works in a public capacity.  His family are cautious in celebrating.  The best they can hope for is a long, slow recovery. Whether  he can return to his work is unknown

This focus on returning to normality is understandable because no one likes to be frightened  but is a denial of the economic and  human costs of a pandemic. I’m not convinced by the idea that there is already significant herd immunity or that only the elderly suffer (and if they are, are they so expendable?).  Blood donors  in The Netherlands  were checked and it was found that 3% had acquired antibodies. Even if the real figure is double that, it is only 6%.   and South Korea is  reporting people becoming reinfected.

l It also seems the virus can  have a psychiatric/ neurological effect too.  That may be due to  it entering the central nervous system.  I spent a day over the weekend studying remotely online with a group including physicians working on COVID wards.   they have all had experiences of people becoming  psychotic while ill and the consequences of this are yet to be understood.  The consultant supervising one young doctor had died because of lack of appropriate Ppe.  He was in his early fifties with a family. 

I hate to imagine the pressures involved in making any decision about opening up.  There are still too many unknowns but those who do know about health, economic  etc are working hard to find a compromise and I’d prefer to wait a while. 





I’m guessing that those of us in less affected areas or when news outlets confuse us with an agenda cannot see what is really going on and no one can truly say what should happen as this situation is unprecedented.  But there are most certainly experts and governments whose advice I would prefer to be heard over others.

[Treasur]

It seems to me that events are naturally causing societies to consider their priorities and how some of their underpinning values work in practice in this situation. Which probably includes looking at the existing fault lines in our individual nations, and the balance between rights and responsibilities that is part of being a member of any collective group.  And different societies are finding that it puts pressure on different tender spots perhaps. So, for instance, here in the UK we have been one of the countries that has prioritised a service economy and a growth in freelance work and zero hours contracts (when essentially you are 'on call' but your hours and wage/benefits are less secure). These are many of our lowest paid workers working at minimum wage so very little savings and many of them fall through the safety net of some of the schemes in the UK designed to keep people afloat. Along with sub groups, often of older people or those in rural areas, who do not have much access to online services. Their experience is quite different from someone who is being paid 80% of a reasonable salary or who had a professional job where they can work virtually. Or indeed someone who is working a front line essential job where truthfully they are more exposed to the risk of infection.....everyone from nurses to care workers to bus drivers. Not everyone is in the same boat are they? And that raises some real questions for all of our countries about the resilience of our economies and societies imho.....how the 'old' accepted objectives adapt (or not) to this new current normal and what might be the next normal.

The rights vs responsibilities issue I guess is one that we have all encountered with an MLC spouse as LP says. Did my xh have the right to determine his own path and choose a different life? Yes, of course he did. Did he also have the responsibility to not take a sledgehammer to other people's lives as far as that was possible? Yes imho.....but no one could force him to do that and he self evidently didn't want to do that. Which meant that the rest of us affected by his 'rights' also had the 'right' to protect ourselves and judge him as a poor quality human for being so callous and self-centred. Do I feel the same way about people who choose to ignore social distancing bc they want to go to the beach or exercise their legal right to protest politically? I do tbh.....I can't stop them and I don't like the idea of living in the kind of police state that throws people into jail for it....but I have opinions about folks who don't seem to balance rights with responsibilities. Jmo.

Our individual take on rights vs responsibilities probably comes down to our core beliefs and values. I am not overly anxious about getting the virus....although it doesn't sound like a great way to die....in the greater scheme of things my life is less important than it was and I have no dependents. But it is unacceptable to me to increase the risk of my inadvertently hurting others......so constraining my comfort or some of my rights or even my economic wellbeing is a price worth paying as a member of my society.  Deciding where that line is depends on my values and my society's values......so as events unfold, I guess all of us get to examine that as we go. And to consider our political systems (with a small p) and how our leaders act  is probably part of that too.

I am open-minded enough to see that both Mr Trump and Mr Johnson were elected bc they spoke to needs that people felt mattered to them, even if I might not have voted for either of them. I also think that it is entirely likely that all governments have made mistakes in their responses as well as achieved things that are less visible perhaps, and that the effectiveness of a government system is not simply based on a personal judgement of an individual leader. But I also think that in difficult times, character matters bc it shapes what leaders believe and prioritise. I personally find some of Mr Trump's lens, as shown by some of his behaviour, as troubling as I currently find Mr Johnson's absence from public discussion and the vacuum in clear fact-based government communication that seems to exist here. As Nerissa said, in uncertain times, trust matters.....as does a degree of empathy that not all boats are equal in this storm....and we all know from personal life experience how easily trust can be broken and how hard it can be to rebuild.

I guess what we will all be finding out is the extent to which the leaders and systems we currently have reflect the values and evolving priorities of the nations they lead.....

I must admit though, a bit like dealing with MLC, that there is a point for me when what I crave is feeling as if I am dealing with rational grown ups lol.

[xyzcf]

A very simplistic thought when I woke up this morning concerning the issue of "freedom" and "rights"...we expect the police to protect us, to patrol, enforce laws, to find the bad guys. We expect the fire department to put out fires.....if our house were on fire and the firefighters told us we could not go into the inferno, we would agree that to reenter the burning building against the advice of the firefighters would be suicide.

The police, the firefighters put themselves in danger to protect us.

Doctors, nurses and other medical personal, transit workers and other essential services are risking their lives to save ours.

Innocent "victims" are infected and dying, and it really isn't clear what those numbers will eventually be and it won't be for some time yet...but we know that large numbers of people are dying and that the medical supplies are not adequate either to protect the workers nor to give care to the surge of cases that can only be somewhat contained by the measures that are being taken.

These draconian measures are the one and only weapon we have at present to contain this. In time, when treatments and a vaccine are available, we will have better tools...but right now we don't have those things. In a nation such as this, we do not even have enough cotton swabs to perform the testing that must happen to create a safe environment for ALL people to start to return to a normal life.

Many individuals and organizations are coming up with inventive ways to help...the construction of handmade masks is a great example of people trying to do what they can.

Then there are those with their guns and their flags marching against what? That around the world, public health measures are being put in place to limit the casualties.

There seems to be an extreme disconnect between a pandemic caused by a virus that not much is known about and how that has been turned somehow into a political battle and infringement of rights.

There is no basis of realism in those who think we should just open everything up and take our chances. The data is very raw and will require some more time to determine what this virus can do to people...example being the information of the way it is affecting the brain.

Those same people not social distancing yesterday at the demonstrations will be the same ones going to my local grocery store today, possibly spreading the virus to the workers who are at the cash and stocking the shelves, trying to make sure that there is a food supply.

I ask, what about the freedom and rights of those grocery store workers?

The following information was obtained from an article I read this morning about how South Korea, using the measures that we are speaking about has been able to contain the virus. This stood out to me as something to consider:

"South Korea has an enviable record of handling the outbreak. It has recorded five deaths per million of population, compared to 42 in Canada, 122 in the United States and 437 in Spain. On Sunday, there were just eight new cases reported in South Korea."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/investigates/south-korea-covid-19-outbreak-record-1.5537631

That kind of information is very valuable to me in deciding what "freedoms" and "rights" I am willing to let go of TEMPORAILITY to protect the lives of others.

An article that explains the inequality of how the poor and marginalized will be the ones who will die from COVID if the push to reopen occurs too quickly.

"A Trump reopening in May will be only a partial reopening. Not all backs are equally exposed to the whip of immediate necessity. Trump can readily enough impel office cleaners back to the bank towers; he will have a harder time with the bankers themselves. Administration officials speak of a “phased reopening.” But if the reopening starts in May, it will be phased not by medical advice, but by the hard grammar of wealth and poverty: poorest first, richest last."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/04/trump-trading-lives-poor-economic-growth/610264/