Lokasenna
Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012 From: Iowan in MD/DC Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel There have been many media stories the past ten days that the American South is taking it on the chin, including the one excerpted below. To an extent this has been reflected in here with numerous comments, contentions and viewpoints. Turns out the contention is mostly wrong. Georgia, our 8th most populous state, is currently 10th in mortality per million. Florida, 3rd most populous, is 21st. North Carolina, 9th most populous, is 42nd. Louisiana is problematic: 25th most populous but 3rd highest mortality per million. And Mississippi is taking a hit: 35th but 17th highest mortality. The other southern states are doing comparatively well, very well or about even (population rank/morality per M): Alabama, at 24 is 26th. Kentucky, at 26 is 24th South Carolina, at 23 is 28th. Tennessee, at 16 is 31st. Arkansas, at 34 is 43rd. Virginia, at 12 is 35th. These numbers will fluctuate but, as they currently stand, the narrative presented has been wrong. Very wrong. As we progress through this thing here in the US, I'm more thankful than ever that we have a federal system that somewhat pushes down power and responsibility. I'm glad my county called shots for me for a long time; then my state; and that the situation hasn't reached the point where a nationwide one-size-fits-all mandate had to be imposed. The South is doing doggone well. It's still early yet. I would be hesitant to draw any conclusions about how well or not well a state is doing (unless qualified by a "maybe" and why) for at least another week. More than that, in the case of states that got a later start on it or states that don't have good stay-at-home orders. I'll have some graphs later today which should help illustrate where states are in their curves. For Georgia, there is some weirdness in the data (1000 new cases reported on 3/31, but 158 the day before and 709 the day after? Etc.) Just glancing at the raw numbers, Georgia does not appear to have peaked yet. The narrative presented is that there is a threat of disparate impact, not that there has already been a disparate impact. A nationwide one-size-fits-all mandate absolutely would have been better, were it legal and possible to do so. The mandates at the state and local levels are almost all identical (one size) and almost all were implemented at similar times relative to infection rates. That's really not all that different from "one size fits all" at all. Hypothetically: mandatory stay-at-home with exceptions for essentials only once community spread from unknown sources began. Also, a quibble: Virginia is no longer really in the "South" .
|