LogFAQs > #941730522

adjl posted...

You think Americans have done a good job of following guidelines? You really think that? You had people openly flaunting them in large numbers within a week of stuff shutting down. You have sizable chunks of the country convinced that the virus doesn't even exist, thanks to the guy who's supposed to be running the place. You have people staging armed rebellions over having to cut their own hair.

"Large numbers"? The protests shown by the media were maybe dozens of people. Compare that to the hundreds who showed for BLM protests which, in some cities, went up to thousands.

adjl posted...

Low-income Americans have had the highest infection rates largely because they're the ones that haven't had the option of not working and a considerable majority of "essential" jobs are the entry-level minimum wage ones (which, incidentally, people are awfully fond of insisting are unnecessary and therefore don't deserve a livable minimum wage, but that's none of MY business...) that are filled primarily by lower-income people.

First off, by your own admission, a lot of the people getting more today than they made at their job are low-income Americans. Demographics are demographics. Second, a lot of high-income jobs are also essential. In the most obvious case, doctors are at the front lines of the disease and they make far more than most Americans (the same can be true of nurses, depending on the specialty).

And a lot of low-skilled laborers are unnecessary, just as a lot of workers are unnecessary. However, that's not the argument for low pay -- the fact that they're paid little is because they don't have skills and the work isn't worth much. You might need somebody for a job, but that doesn't automatically make them valuable to that job, especially when you could hire any number of people off the street who could do it just as well. And minimum wage is more than the value of the work in many cases.

However, a lot of low-income Americans aren't low-income earners, they're no-income earners who are receiving checks from the government.

adjl posted...

Those jobs are still happening. Lower-income people can't afford to protest because that would mean missing work, which is a luxury they don't have at the best of times. The people that are likely to turn out at these protests are the people that are able to afford time off work/are surviving just fine off of unemployment money, which, by extension, is a group that's been able to safely limit their exposure and stay healthy.

...except for the fact that a lot of low-income people are being paid not to work. Most low-income jobs are, like all other jobs, closed still due to the lockdowns or businesses not being able to afford workers (which also comes back to minimum wage being worth more than the actual labor). And pretty much every protest has countless low-income Americans, both traditional low-earners as well as no-earners.

adjl posted...

No, that suggests that the extent to which guidelines are enforced depends on more than just the best available public health advice. Which, you know, everyone with half a brain already knew. It has never just been about public health. Politics, economics, and even other aspects of public health (e.g. public sanitation) have always factored into the decision. "Allowing" the protests (not that anything short of full-on bombing the streets could realistically have stopped them, given the scale) does not in any way suggest that there's no benefit in following guidelines, it suggests that "I'm sorry, please wait until the pandemic has resolved to be upset by widespread police brutality and corruption" would be political suicide.

Except it literally does that. If the guidelines actually meant shit, they'd be enforced. The fact that they're not enforced suggests that it was likely a farce all along.

adjl posted...

Seriously enough to enforce them when the cost is something relatively trivial or easily replaced with a safer alternative. My own church has been doing services via Zoom since March. Alternatives exist to having people crowd into a physical church building, even if they aren't as nice as actually being there. Alternatives don't exist to publicly protesting a grave injustice.

And you could easily protest without taking to the streets, be it posting propaganda, using social media, writing letters, etc.


---

(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.