MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Essential Workers’

To Mitigate Racial Inequity, the CDC Wants To Vaccinate Essential Workers Before the Elderly – Reason.com

Posted by M. C. on December 19, 2020

Part of the reason for this, according to a CDC report, is to mitigate and racial and ethnic “health inequities.” Older Americans are disproportionately white, whereas the essential worker category includes a larger percentage of racial minorities and low-income people.

“Older populations are whiter, ” Harald Schmidt, a professor of ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, told The New York Times. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”

https://reason.com/2020/12/18/vaccine-cdc-essential-workers-elderly-racial-covid-19/

Robby Soave

Deaths from COVID-19 are overwhelmingly concentrated among the elderly, and thus it would seem obvious that vaccinating older Americans should be a top priority. Yet the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have released guidance suggesting that millions of essential workers should receive the vaccine before many people 65 and older.

Part of the reason for this, according to a CDC report, is to mitigate and racial and ethnic “health inequities.” Older Americans are disproportionately white, whereas the essential worker category includes a larger percentage of racial minorities and low-income people.

“Older populations are whiter, ” Harald Schmidt, a professor of ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, told The New York Times. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”

It’s not as if there’s a consensus that this is the right thing to do. The Times notes that this approach “runs counter to frameworks proposed by the World Health Organization, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, and many countries, which say that reducing deaths should be the unequivocal priority and that older and sicker people should thus go before the workers, a view shared by many in public health and medicine.”

Indeed, this is a prime example of progressive thinking on racial justice leading otherwise intelligent people to take a position that actually hurts racial minorities. While it’s true that the 65-and-up demographic is somewhat whiter than the general population, there are still millions of elderly people of color, and they have by far the greatest risk of dying from COVID-19—the age skew of the disease’s victims is extreme. A policy of vaccinating police officers, firefighters, and grocery store employees before the elderly is clearly suboptimal, even from the standpoint of just trying to save as many people of color from dying as possible.

“The decision here is to not prioritize vaccinating them, but to instead vaccinate a different, less vulnerable group of people and then assert that this creates some kind of abstract collective racial benefit,” notes Matt Yglesias in a terrific post on this subject. “There have been a lot of takes lately about woke liberals prioritizing symbolic racial issues over the concrete needs of non-white people, but this idea really takes the cake.”

As Yglesias explains in greater detail:

Basically, if you take 1,000 prime-age Americans you’d expect to have 150 African-Americans in the pool versus about 100 if you take 1,000 senior citizens. So in that sense, vaccinating essential workers promotes racial equity because you’re giving shots to more Black people. But since the infection fatality rate for senior citizens is at least 10 times the rate for non-seniors, you’re not actually saving Black people’s lives this way. You’re opting for a strategy that leads to more Black deaths and more white deaths than the “vaccinate seniors first” strategy, but deciding that it’s better for equity and this is what ethics requires.

There are other problems with vaccinating essential workers before senior citizens, in that the former is an expansive and debatable category. Depending on who gets counted, some 70 percent of the workforce can be deemed essential, though restricting it to just “front line” workers gets that percentage down significantly, according to the Times. And while it’s true that vaccinating people in the workforce who are most likely to spread the disease to others could be a sound strategy for ultimately preventing deaths, this is a complicated approach and the current supply of vaccines is inadequate.

Yglesias recommends vaccinating health care workers, and then going by age: 85 and up, then 80 and up, then 75 and up, etc. This idea has a lot of merit, especially when the vaccine supply remains limited.

Ultimately, it’s up to the states to determine who gets vaccinated first; the CDC’s guidance is only a recommendation. Still, it’s regrettable that the CDC has embraced an approach to racial equity that might keep people in need of the vaccine from getting it first.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

We Are Not “All In This Together” . . . But Perhaps “We” Should Be – EPautos – Libertarian Car Talk

Posted by M. C. on May 15, 2020

Millions of people who have little to fear from Corona have accepted house arrest, business arrest and are practically begging the government to treat the entire population as a leper colony in perpetuity – using whatever means necessary – and no matter what it costs.

Perhaps those costs should be spread around some more. It might do something to curtail the hysteria – and just maybe, we’ll be able to re-establish normalcy.

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2020/05/14/we-are-not-all-in-this-together-but-perhaps-we-should-be/

There are two questions that deserve answers as the “new normal” is imposed on the rest of us by some of us.

The first is: At what point does an asserted risk to some no longer justify the imposition of certain harm on everyone? At least 33 million Americans have been forced out of their jobs and into the poorhouse; every American has had his life diminished, basic freedoms curtailed – his peace of mind assaulted.

Well, not every American. Which brings up the second question:

Why aren’t the some who have imposed open-ended harm on the many required to share in the harm they insist is necessary?

We are told that “people are dying” – and indeed they are. But how did this suddenly become a blank check claim on the lives of everyone else? It is considered unfeeling to make cost-benefit calculations when human lives are at risk but this is nonetheless something we do all the time – without insisting on a zero-risk result, no matter the cost.

Until now.

Suddenly, a virus with a mortality rate similar to that of seasonal flus that’s less a threat than medical malpractice has become an intolerable risk that justifies unlimited harm inflicted on almost everyone.

But not everyone.

Because we are not – as the treacly phrase has it – “all in this together.”

Some of us – the people who’ve imposed the harm on the rest of us – are very much out of this. Some go about their business uninhibited and unscathed; these some having the power to declare their business (and their paychecks) “essential” while simultaneously declaring ours not.

Why is this tolerated?

If, in fact, we are “all in this together”?

There is a glib congruency between those who urge harm on all for the sake of some. The people so urging are almost axiomatically people who aren’t being harmed, which explains their position nicely.

The politicians and bureaucrats; the fulsomely “essential” workers who continue to get paid while the rest of us continue to bleed. The big box stores and large corporate retailers.

Their businesses are open.

The Essential People are not falling behind on their mortgages, watching their savings disappear, the work of a lifetime evaporating with each passing day of enforced idleness. They aren’t suffering the humiliation of having to beg for government alms and staring at a future of poverty and want.

It is certainly is easier for The Essential People to demand that others suffer. Because they aren’t suffering. They have the luxury of averring all risk – because it imposes no costs  . . . on them.

But they have the gall – or is it simply moral deafness? – to tell the rest of us that “we are all in this together.” Meaning, we bleed while they preen.

They have achieved this by shaming us on the one hand and virtue-signaling on the other.

If we complain about being bankrupted we are putting dollars over lives. If we question Fear Masking mandates, anti-social distancing edicts and Soviet-style bread lines to get into stores we are indifferent to the health of our fellow man.

“People are dying!”

Indeed, they are.

About the same number as have died in the past from or more accurately because of complications developed from various other forms of Corona,  such as pneumonia in the elderly and already very sick and so already very susceptible.

This is normal.

It was accepted as part of life until all of a sudden it wasn’t – because of a concerted propaganda campaign unparalleled in the history of the world that has succeeded in terrorizing the population into a state of paralytic obeisance, using – per Dr. Goebbel’s instructions – a kernel of truth:

There is a virus; it does present a real danger to some.

None of that is new.

But by creating the impression of newness and by greatly exaggerating the threat, one can generate new hysteria.

Note that the media organs have in concerted fashion – as if on cue – recently begun calling Corona “COVID-19,” in order to get the public using that term, too. And the public has begun to use it, reflexively – unconsciously – like a flock of ducks quacking on cue.

Like 911.

This is linguistic conditioning intended to get the public to think of this Corona as a wildly different and wildly more threatening Corona, which it isn’t – in order to terrify the public into believing it must accept a “new normal” – more linguistic conditioning – of greatly restricted personal freedom and practically unlimited government authority.

The public is also being conditioned to regard infections –  styled “cases,” to give it weight – as something abnormal.

Which, again, it isn’t.

Well, it wasn’t.

Millions of “cases” normally occur each year; i.e., almost everyone gets infected with various colds and flus over the course of their lives. All of a sudden, these are terrifying “cases” – reported ominously, every day. Thereby making them seem ominous.

It is much more threatening to hear about 230,000 new “cases” than a few thousand deaths.

The latter sad but not abnormal.

More than 100,000 Americans died in 1968 of – or with – the Hong Kong Flu. Why wasn’t the country “locked down” then? Because the country wasn’t yet in the grip of a consolidated media – and pervasive instilled fear of risk – such that a bad flu season could be turned into a simulacrum of the Black Death in the minds of the population.

America was a sane country back then.

It is becoming insane.

The Goebbelsian kernel of truth about the “novel” Corona virus hyped to an extinction level threat terrorizes the suggestible and emotional – and makes it very difficult for the thoughtful and rational to be heard amid the manufactured hysteria.

People are dying!

Weapons of mass destruction!

It worked 20 years ago, when the kernel of truth was “Islamic terrorism,” though the actual threat to most of us of an ululating jihadi making off with “our freedom” was in the same ballpark as the threat to almost all of us of being killed by the “novel”
Corona virus.

Millions of people who aren’t sick are walking around wearing surgical masks and gloves – to avoid giving something they haven’t got but dread they may have. This is the very definition of neurosis. Four months ago, people so afflicted would have been pitied – and treated, psychiatrically.

Not emulated.

Millions of people who have little to fear from Corona have accepted house arrest, business arrest and are practically begging the government to treat the entire population as a leper colony in perpetuity – using whatever means necessary – and no matter what it costs.

Perhaps those costs should be spread around some more. It might do something to curtail the hysteria – and just maybe, we’ll be able to re-establish normalcy.

Be seeing you

lab rat

Trapped

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Bill de Blasio: NYC Preparing to Furlough, Lay Off Essential Workers

Posted by M. C. on May 7, 2020

Give me free money or you will die.

Extortion:

Extortion (also called shakedown, and, in a legal sense incorrectly, exaction) is obtaining benefit through coercion. In most jurisdictions it is likely to constitute a criminal offense; the bulk of this article deals with such cases. Robbery is the simplest form of extortion.

What did he expect from a total lockdown?

de Blasio is pretty dumb even by communist standards.

https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2020/05/06/bill-de-blasio-nyc-preparing-to-furlough-lay-off-essential-workers/

by Katherine Rodriguez

Democrat New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced Wednesday that he would have to begin to furlough or lay off essential New York City employees if the city does not receive federal stimulus funds to fill budget deficits caused by the coronavirus.

“Right now what I’m staring down the barrel of, and cities and states all over the country, people are either acting on furloughs and layoffs or preparing for furloughs or layoffs of the exact people who have been the heroes in this crisis who we should be celebrating and supporting — first responders, the health care workers, the educators,” de Blasio said on CNN’s New Day.

“How are we going to support these people who we need if we don’t have any money?” de Blasio asked.

The New York Democrat has said in the past that cuts to the workforce would be used only as a last resort.

President Donald Trump told the New York Post in an exclusive interview Monday that Democrat-run states like New York that are cash-strapped should not expect to be bailed out because it would be unfair to Republican states.

De Blasio has had to change his expectations on other things related to the coronavirus as well.

De Blasio recently announced that New York City’s public schools would be revising its grading system for most of its students for the duration of the pandemic.

Be seeing you

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »