Home » On the failure to apply a cost/benefit analysis to COVID policy

Comments

On the failure to apply a cost/benefit analysis to COVID policy — 36 Comments

  1. The environmentalist “Precautionary Principle” has been applied to Covid for the same reason and goal as mitigation of Climate Change .

  2. This quote from Otto Von Bismarck has some relevance to our current situation, “Preventive war is like committing suicide out of fear of death.”

  3. Methinks the reason for the failure of analyzing the cost benefit of COVID is simply the lust for power, as many have said. It’s on a global level, but I’m unfortunately very familiar with very similar reasoning on a much more personal level. Although at this level I simply call it “control” and not “power”, but it’s the same psychosis. I know several friends, acquaintances, even relatives who want to tell me to vaccinate, to mask, to socially distance, etc. simply because they hope that gives them the satisfaction of being in control over me. And if they can alter my behavior in even some little way ( I can’t fly without a gd mask, e.g.) then their desire for control/power has been satisfied.

  4. Yes, it’s hard to discern the “why”. Obvi, there’s psy-ops involved.
    They say “If this proposal (total societal shutdown) only saves ONE life, it will be worth it.” Mushy thinkers nod their heads …
    Yet, they can’t be enticed to examine stuff like “How many kids will be left alone at home for distance learning? How many will stop learning? How many will commit suicide? How many families will be shattered by job loss?”
    The list goes on forever, but “their” willingness to examine the questions is nil.

    Thus the growth of conspiracy theories.
    How is it possible for them to ban HCQ or Ivermectin? Well known, no horrible side effects and you can go ahead with other treatments too. No downside.

    Yet they are doing a full-court censorship, one wonders why.
    1) To enrich Big Pharma. Fat good the money will do them if they’re sent to jail or their names are blackened in history for all time. So one feels a limit there.
    2) To depopulate the world. Gee. That’s a pretty big conspiracy. Really. Really. Big.
    3) Mass psychosis among members of the Dem Party, MSM, gov’t employees and teachers, celebs, etc

    It’s a puzzle.
    Though you can’t deny they are being enriched by it

  5. Yes, to all of this.

    One of my theories that I have been ruminating about for several years involves children. Up until the last 100 years or so couples would have huge families and not just the poor (Queen Victoria had like 7 or 8 children) and yes some of that was lack of birth control but there was also an unspoken assumption that some of those children would die at a very young age. Think of it as scarcity. There is more value in an item that there are less of.

    Now, with women often having only one child the thought of losing that one child is beyond terrifying. And this comes at a time when children (in the first world) have never been safer. Hence we see all kinds of irrational fears from middle class women (mostly) about all kinds of threats real and imagined and that has exploded to immense proportions with COVID which is a minute risk for children but is treated like the gravest threat ever.

  6. I agree with all of the above. A year and a half ago, I assumed the panic would be short lived and that, eventually, cooler heads would prevail. Regardless of how much the left, the government and the media (redundant, I know) might want to exploit the panic, at some point, a great many ordinary folk would calm down and start performing cost-benefit analyses…at least implicitly.

    Well, I was quite wrong. Depressingly wrong.

    Neo and others have discussed much of this before but, surely one of the tragedies of our success as a civilization is that we have been able to banish death to the shadows of old age and certain chronic diseases (which, though serious, are miniscule in their mortality levels compared to the diseases of merely 150 years ago). All other means of dying ‘young’ (say, under 60) are extremely rare in the West. Sure accidents happen, but they’re highly unlikely compared to even a century ago. Even wars, post WWII, have far few casualties and very few civilian casualties (again, in the West) than any time in the past. And so, most of us under 60 go merrily on our way, rarely thinking about mortality (ours or our peers’).

    A pandemic with as high a death toll as this one (though miniscule compared to the Spanish Flu) is not just jarring in and of itself. Its shock is compounded by the fact that our society is no longer used to such a blunt, face to face, confrontation with mortality. Most of us are ill equipped for this confrontation. Really, only the Greatest Generation can remember a time when sudden deaths among the relatively young were fairly commonplace. And there’s very few Greatest Generation still around.

    The above explains the sheepish acceptance of many Americans (and not just those who are left of center) of even the most absurd and restrictive Covid policies. It also is a very ominous portent of what will happen during the next ‘public health crisis’.

  7. The cost/benefit analysis analysis for covid issues was never done, but I also think it was never done for automobiles. If it had been done for cars, I think we would have spent (a lot of) money on differently designed highways and on various safety technologies.

  8. The probability of a child dying from COVID is roughly the same as someone dying in a traffic accident because that child was driven to the vaccination site.

  9. No one has a right to operate assault-style high mass vehicles (e.g. electric+risk of chemical-fueled perpetual conflagration, tractor trailers). Then there are dual-use items, including: vacuums, bats, picks, shirts, pants, and, of course, the double-edged scalpel that is responsible for millions of excess deaths annually inside and outside of planned parent/hood offices and clinics. #HateLovesAbortion

  10. It was much talked about and mocked on the right but when Cuomo said ‘if it saves one life it will all be worth it’ should have been a bright flashing sign saying WARNING for what was to come.

  11. The probability of a child dying from COVID is roughly the same as someone dying in a traffic accident because that child was driven to the vaccination site.

    i think that given a mandate, the conditional probability of the latter becomes higher than the former (i.e. infection and disease progression), and still an elevated risk (efficacy and adversity) associated with the vaccines.

  12. Hah, Cuomo. The man from planned parent/hood speaks, and exercises liberal license to indulge diversity [dogma] (e.g. sexism… genderism – feminine attributes?).

  13. Yeah, Cuomo is an idiot but at that time he was the governor of the state being hit hardest and the media loved him so what he said set a tone for the attitude that was to come.

  14. and the media loved [Cuomo] so what he said set a tone for the attitude that was to come

    And then, in a twist of karmic irony, he was deemed a “burden”, and summarily aborted. Let us also remember Whitmer Closet, the woman from planned parent/hood, and a… another handmade tale, a conveniently scheduled, government-lead operation to distract, project, and ordain.

  15. Greenwald wonders,

    “Given how many deaths and serious injuries would be prevented, why is nobody clamoring for a ban on cars, or at least severe restrictions on who can drive…

    Nobody as of yet… but give them time, as they’re are not done. Not by a long shot.

    ” Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.

    It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.

    The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” C.S. Lewis

    neo ponders, “Greenwald doesn’t get into why this is happening. And I don’t know why either.”

    We all know that for the democrats, it’s about gaining greater control but the other side of the coin is why so many people are going along with it. Therein lies the real mystery.

    Yes, fear of Covid was a major factor but the longer the fearmongers scream, the less the effect. I suspect it has to do with a more general fear that has arisen over decades in the West. Perhaps starting with the baby boomers. Today, “Safe Spaces” are a clue, along with the demand for bicycle helmets and lately the demand that “offensive speech” be banned…

    Those on the left seek protection above all else. From life’s natural vicissitudes but also from any possible threat.

    The Antifa and BLM riots had a definite temper tantrum vibe about them.

    At base, CRT posits victimhood and uses the claim of victimization to justify the assertion that whites are inherently racist. Without the ‘proof’ of victimization (“lived experience!”) the whole enterprise is exposed as a power grab.

    The irony that Biden, their agent in the WH has just raised the threat of terrorism to unprecedented levels only briefly held their attention. But then, denial is easily renewed when reality is rejected. Inevitably, when the reality of terrorism reemerges then the concommitent calls for appeasement will reemerge.

    A woke military would not have the stomach for defending a society they hate. And civilians who celebrate such a military haven’t the guts to stand firm in the face of fanatical malevolence. Western Europe, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are in the forefront of the woke and they will surrender to tyranny because “the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse. … A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.”

    Driving the military’s “rough and ready men” out and relpacing them with the “woke” will ultimately prove suicidal. Men who like to dress up as women and women who tell themselves that they are as tough as any man are not going to stand up to and defeat the Taliban, much less China’s confident military.

  16. Given how many deaths and serious injuries would be prevented, why is nobody clamoring for a ban on cars, or at least severe restrictions on who can drive (essential purposes only) or how fast (25 mph)?

    Because there are IMMENSE human benefits attached to cars and trucks, whose loss due to such restrictions would become apparent to a large enough group of voters that such said restrictions would be run out of town on a rail.

    Much of the ‘stuff’ whose availability we take for granted (oh, say groceries in stores) comes thanks to trucks on our ingeniously constructed road network. And the vast human mobility we also take for granted depends completely on those evil cars, and again on that road network.

    Mr. Greenwald has rightly noted those immense benefits, and shown why both sides of the ledger should be accounted for.

    And the failure of our governing bodies to tot up the costs of the Covid lockdowns forms a clear illustration of their narrow-minded determination to amass autocratic power for their executives, at the expense of all those millions of lost jobs and other restrictions.

  17. Some people are doing some level of risk/benefit analysis of covid issues (from the Epoch Times).

    The two main COVID-19 vaccines used in the United States are more likely to land teenage boys in the hospital than COVID-19 itself, a new study has found.

    Researchers analyzing reports submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a passive reporting system run by U.S. health authorities, discovered that the rate of cardiac adverse events for males between the ages of 12 and 15 without a serious underlying health condition after getting their second Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 dose was up to 6 times higher than their risk of COVID-19 hospitalization.
    . —
    The United Kingdom’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, for instance, recommends healthy children not get a COVID-19 vaccine at present until more safety and efficacy data become available.

    The benefits do not outweigh the risks, the panel said in July, citing reports of post-vaccination heart inflammation.

    Sadly, the U.S. government seems to be worse in this regard than either the U.K. or Denmark. Many months ago Denmark recommended that the risk of an AstraZeneca double jab for women aged 40 to 50 was worse than the risk of covid. That vaccine risk was the risk of VITT or vaccine induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia.

  18. The City of Seattle ruling junta (they were ‘elected’ by mail) has reduced the speed limit to 20 MPH for residential streets and 25 for most arterials.

    The example is not absurd. On the other hand, Seattle governance is absurd.

    Yes, the (100% leftist) city council members really are that shallow, ignorant, and foolish.

  19. David D —

    That was in 2016. You’d think that if the traffic/pedestrian fatalities had dropped in subsequent years you’d hear all about it, wouldn’t you? I haven’t heard a damn thing.

    Probably because the kind of people who drive poorly and kill people are also the kind of people who don’t obey speed limits.

    I have no doubt that in a few more years, they’ll admit that it made no difference, and conclude that they just need to reduce speed limits even further.

  20. @BryanLovely:

    “Probably because the kind of people who drive poorly and kill people are also the kind of people who don’t obey speed limits.”

    Sorry to say that I don’t foresee you having a great career in Public Policy. I mean you’re talking sense.

    *puts hand up in back of class*

    Driving standards in the Third World are non-existent.

    Perhaps importing Third Worlders (via legal or illegal immigration) is a Bad Idea.

    *goes to sit in the corner*

  21. There’s a meme going around.

    It’s a still photo of a female reporter holding a microphone out towards two elderly, Amish gentlemen. She asks, “Why isn’t your community suffering the effects of COVID?”

    One of the gentlemen replies, “No TVs.”

  22. Bryan Lovely,

    It’s for all the bicyclists or so they say. In Seattle in pre COVID before times there was no more outsized lobby than the bicyclists. Are they still around? Don’t hear much about them anymore.

  23. Cost benefit analysis may underlie the Florida law banning mask mandates.
    Even if it doesn’t, the ban is the right thing to do, and at least one court agrees to go forward, if not exactly for that reason.

    https://notthebee.com/article/victory-appeals-court-says-desantiss-ban-on-school-mask-mandates-can-resume

    Pointing to “serious doubts” about the lawsuit, an appeals court Friday put on hold a circuit judge’s ruling that said Gov. Ron DeSantis overstepped his constitutional authority in a July 30 executive order aimed at preventing school mask mandates.

    A three-judge panel of the 1st District Court of Appeal reinstated a stay of the ruling by Leon County Circuit Judge John Cooper, clearing the way for the state to try to block school districts from requiring students to wear masks during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    The decision was a blow to a group of parents who filed the lawsuit and argued that children would be harmed by DeSantis’ executive order. While the panel said it would issue a full written explanation later, the one-paragraph order Friday expressed skepticism about the parents’ case.

    The parents argued that not allowing students to make their own choice about wearing a mask – rather than being either compelled to wear one or forced not to wear one – was a violation of the rights of the children by endangering those who, presumably, would choose to wear masks.

    I’m pretty skeptical on that argument as well.

  24. BUT while we were watching the Taliban and the Vaxxinators cage match, this is happening behind our backs in front of our faces:
    https://notthebee.com/article/biden-administration-proposes-comprehensive-financial-account-reporting-regime

    It seems the Biden administration is into the whole “Totalitarian Dystopia” vibe.

    This might’ve slipped under the radar for most people earlier in the year, but the implications of this are huge.

    The Biden administration’s Treasury Department published a document in May called “The American Families Plan Tax Compliance Agenda.”

    You already know that with a nice-sounding title like that, this document is the stuff of nightmares.

    “For already compliant taxpayers, the only effect of this regime is to provide easy access to summary information on financial accounts and to decrease the likelihood of costly ‘no fault’ examinations,”

    I guess they’re fine with being called a “regime.” At least they’re honest.
    The document tries to downplay the fact that that Biden administration wants to establish a “comprehensive financial account reporting regime.” The regime really wants this to seem like simple and inconsequential shift, but Matt Welch at Reason.com describes the implications of the proposal.

    “‘All business and personal accounts from financial institutions, including bank, loan, and investment accounts,’ would be forced to ‘report gross inflows and outflows’ to the IRS,” Matt Welch. “And not just bank accounts: The dragnet would now include PayPal, settlement companies, and ‘crypto asset exchanges,’ for starters.”

    This proposed “comprehensive financial account reporting regime” seemingly wants to monitor virtually all financial transactions, including “PayPal, settlement companies, and ‘crypto asset exchanges.'”

  25. None of this can happen without the more-than-willing cooperation of millions of citizens.
    Why?

    Have tens of millions of people suddenly become irrational? Or has the irrationality formed to fit the structure of society in such a way that one doesn’t bump into the other? That might show itself in voting patterns.

    But, now, with a brand new factor, irrationality can be allowed to run free. And it includes what must have a better term for it than “virtue signaling to oneself”.

    Without these tens of millions firing up their yummy irrationality, we’d be looking at a new flu, if anybody bothered.

  26. Never mind automobiles; if the government really wanted to save lives, end crippling disease, and improve the health of the population, it would ban sugar and corn syrup.

  27. Neo,

    If you recall at the very beginning of Trump’s term. One of the things he ushered in was that cost/benefit analysis for the EPA. It was one of the first things that demonstrated he knew what he was doing. Sadly far to many things government does, lack this simple element.

    I happen to have lived in a city that since the mid 70’s has been fighting the EPA on just this subject. Over 40 years. I will summarize the story as best I can only to demonstrate its absurdity.

    Complaints were made that the cities storm water drains commingled with regular sewer drainage in a medium sized tributary. They forced the city to create a remedy to be approved by them. A total of 4 were proposed. The EPA took by far the most expensive one. Which at the time put the initial cost at nearly 250 million dollars for a 24 square mile city.

    So the city went to court to fight for one of the less expensive and time consuming proposals. (If memory serves it was roughly 85% as effective but at 25% of the cost). After nearly a decade in court a judge ruled the city would have to use the most expensive option. As cost/benefit was not a requirement in the EPA legislation. Only the most effective choice could be chosen.

    So the city was forced to place a CONCURRENT sewer system, running directly next to the current one with a series of pumps and cisterns build in to handle run off. The project finally got off the ground after litigation (appox 1989). And continues to this day. Just last year digging up all the streets south of my home and continuing north this year. 33 years on. This monstrosity continues.

    And while the tributary is clearly cleaner. Flooding has now become routine, (as the pumps must be turned on manually) homeowners tax bill every year is 18% higher to pay for the bonds. And the cost overruns are slowly closing in to 1 billion dollar territory.

    This is what happens when government dictates solutions without looking at alternative choices.

  28. mythx
    Perhaps the government looked at the alternatives, picked the most expensive, most annoying one, and went home to giggle wildly.

  29. @ Aubrey > @ mythx > “Perhaps the government looked at the alternatives, picked the most expensive, most annoying one, and went home to giggle wildly.”

    That’s not even the least likely possibility any more.
    However, my question would be “cui bono?” – who gets the contracts for all that work and the cost overruns, and who do they “donate” to?

  30. It doesn’t matter. The EPA is run and staffed by Gaia-worshipping hippies (a friend used to do IT for them at the Seattle office). They just don’t care about costs.

    The EPA has been chasing diminishing returns for at least thirty years, driving environmental pollutants far below actual toxic levels, and they will never stop because they are on a holy mission. And, unsatisfied by their failure to destroy industrial civilization, they go looking for ever more things to class as “pollutants”, like CO2.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>