Not really because they're doing what they can to help prevent you from getting covid 19. You can chose to go to work or not. You risk getting it every time you go to a public place, or where social distancing can't be practiced.
There are differences in the local rates of infections. People in Utah shouldn't necessarily be guided by the policies necessary in New York. And there's no easy answer to this. I've thought for years that we haven't taken seriously enough the danger from car accidents. Every time I get in my car, I know I'm risking my life. What level of danger is acceptable? We are never going to all agree on that. Companies want to make money. Employees want a paycheck. Everyone wants to live. Balancing those things is not easy- and I don't blame any politician for wrestling with the balance. I DO blame those who think there's an easy solution-- or that the problem is not worth worrying about.
Too strict of rules means less people will follow the rules at all. Find something reasonable with a reasonable risk factor and you'll have more compliance. What is right in this situation is not known because human behavior is the big factor. The fact that this is a huge country with a completely diverse attitude base from big city to rural area to East-West-North-South having one guideline for everyone is unreasonable at best.
So if a city in Iowa relaxed their standards because of the situation there would you expect the local McDonald's to follow the guidelines in that city that are based on scientific/medical data?
Or would you prefer that the McDonald's stay closed until New York allows all businesses to reopen?
This is not a one size fits all solution ans every state has different needs and some states have handled the crisis better than others have.
I can guarantee that if the largest number of cases were in Wyoming and New York only had a few cases then Governor of New York would not be willing to stay shutdown.
Depends on what those state/local policies are and what is the nature of the company.
If the business requires employees to be in close contact with each other or its customers they should use the strictest standard. If the state/local government buys into the masks=tyranny idea and mandates people greet each other with freedom kisses*, the company should just stay closed because everyone is going to have it.
* The type of leaders who believe masks are tyranny tend to be the people who still refuse to say "French" because, well they don't remember why, but it's a principle.
Nope. That's a recipe for insanity. What you're doing is giving complete power to the nuttiest governor who chooses to demand that everyone bathe in hand sanitizer every morning. It fails to appreciate that there are different real risk levels in different places.
Remember, the goal here isn't to reach zero lives lost AT ALL COSTS. That's an insane and impossible standard. The goal is to take the reasonable steps we can to make the risk reasonable and manageable. Which is not all that difficult in MOST places.
Answers & Comments
Not really because they're doing what they can to help prevent you from getting covid 19. You can chose to go to work or not. You risk getting it every time you go to a public place, or where social distancing can't be practiced.
Your life is at risk no matter what you do or where you go, so relax. Your odds of dying are very low.
There are differences in the local rates of infections. People in Utah shouldn't necessarily be guided by the policies necessary in New York. And there's no easy answer to this. I've thought for years that we haven't taken seriously enough the danger from car accidents. Every time I get in my car, I know I'm risking my life. What level of danger is acceptable? We are never going to all agree on that. Companies want to make money. Employees want a paycheck. Everyone wants to live. Balancing those things is not easy- and I don't blame any politician for wrestling with the balance. I DO blame those who think there's an easy solution-- or that the problem is not worth worrying about.
Too strict of rules means less people will follow the rules at all. Find something reasonable with a reasonable risk factor and you'll have more compliance. What is right in this situation is not known because human behavior is the big factor. The fact that this is a huge country with a completely diverse attitude base from big city to rural area to East-West-North-South having one guideline for everyone is unreasonable at best.
Stanford Medical Center said on 5/4/2020:
The infection rate is low.
Should my city be "closed" because there are about 300 people who are currently infected out of 600000?
- I don't see the logic (we are predominately closed... I just don't see the logic).
Should Modoc County, California be completely open when they haven't had any cases of Covid-19?
- Why would they be closed
So if a city in Iowa relaxed their standards because of the situation there would you expect the local McDonald's to follow the guidelines in that city that are based on scientific/medical data?
Or would you prefer that the McDonald's stay closed until New York allows all businesses to reopen?
This is not a one size fits all solution ans every state has different needs and some states have handled the crisis better than others have.
I can guarantee that if the largest number of cases were in Wyoming and New York only had a few cases then Governor of New York would not be willing to stay shutdown.
Depends on what those state/local policies are and what is the nature of the company.
If the business requires employees to be in close contact with each other or its customers they should use the strictest standard. If the state/local government buys into the masks=tyranny idea and mandates people greet each other with freedom kisses*, the company should just stay closed because everyone is going to have it.
* The type of leaders who believe masks are tyranny tend to be the people who still refuse to say "French" because, well they don't remember why, but it's a principle.
Nope. That's a recipe for insanity. What you're doing is giving complete power to the nuttiest governor who chooses to demand that everyone bathe in hand sanitizer every morning. It fails to appreciate that there are different real risk levels in different places.
Remember, the goal here isn't to reach zero lives lost AT ALL COSTS. That's an insane and impossible standard. The goal is to take the reasonable steps we can to make the risk reasonable and manageable. Which is not all that difficult in MOST places.
They should be following the guidelines that their governor put in place.
Haven't heard of local policies.