Question about ebola/beliefs/government........

[CathyA]

I was thinking about this the other day and want to ask.
For those of you who usually feel the government doesn't know what it's doing and you don't trust it, you have been some of the strongest supporters of saying that there's not a real problem with ebola and that according to the CDC, etc.........we have nothing to worry about if we follow the guidelines, etc. (boy....that was a long sentence!) I'm trying to understand, how, in this case you are believing everything the government says..........where in a lot of other instances, you don't believe them.
Just curious.

[CathyA]

oops.........I thought I put this on the Simple Public Policy forum. Can you move it there Alan? Thanks.

[kib]

I'm not convinced the risk of catching the disease if exposed is as low as the CDC wants us to believe. However, I think the chance of exposure at all, provided the level of vigilance stays as high as it's been, is extremely low. So ... while I don't exactly believe there's transparency here, I'm not concerned about becoming infected.

[gimmethesimplelife]

SPOLIER ALERT***** I'm about to go radical and take an anti-Obama stance.....

Seriously, I don't understand the refusal to temporarily end flight service from West Africa - at least from Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia - into the United States. I just don't get it to the point where I wish on this one (just this one) issue we had Romney in office instead - yes, I said it (!!!!!) as I do believe under Romney these flights would have been by now suspended until further notice - better control/eradication of the virus. I've lost some faith in Obama for not ending these flights, I really have.

I also believe that we don't fully know all the means by which this virus is transmitted and that the government is not admitting this, which I find very off putting to say the least. I also believe that this will (probably) die off and not become this horrible thing that many seem to fear but that before this happens there will be a lot of political theater and drama. Nothing new on this last. Rob

[CathyA]

My feelings are............and here goes my broken record speech............We are all (in the U.S.) accustomed to so many freedoms and rights that we have become the "me" country. And we've lost our way in terms of thinking of the good of the whole. I realize the latest R.N. to return from treating people in Africa with ebola probably wasn't treated as well as she should have been. But now she's hiring an attorney to maybe sue the state/federal government for being treated so poorly? She says her civil rights have been violated. This is new to all of us.....citizens, officials, everyone and so there's probably going to be mistakes made. But I think our need for so much me-freedom is causing problems in how we handle this. We don't want to upset anyone, we don't want to upset anyone's money-making ability or their vacations, etc.

Anyhow.......back to the regularly scheduled program.............just curious why those of you who never side with the government, are actually taking what they say about ebola as truth. Not trying to start an argument.......just trying to understand the whys and wherefores of your beliefs.

[iris lily]

I was thinking about this the other day and want to ask.
For those of you who usually feel the government doesn't know what it's doing and you don't trust it, you have been some of the strongest supporters of saying that there's not a real problem with ebola and that according to the CDC, etc.........we have nothing to worry about if we follow the guidelines, etc. (boy....that was a long sentence!) I'm trying to understand, how, in this case you are believing everything the government says..........where in a lot of other instances, you don't believe them.
Just curious.

Not exactly, you are distorting my outlook by trying to represent it.

Generally applicable to most situations:

1) big government tends to f**k up a lot
2) the government's intrusion will likely not make bad things a lot better (see #1)
3) government intrusion into my personal life in an attempt to "help me" not worth it due to #1
4) big gubmnt carrying out quarantine requirements --wow, that's a pretty big civil liberties issue--I know that *I* would be skeptical of Nanny's ability to judge the threat I pose to society and any consequential tamping down of my ability to leave my house, drive in my car, walk my streets, etc. When Nanny G has that much power over me, it may be time to break out the long guns, polish them up, load them.

Ebola is a deadly disease. Of COURSE it's a problem. How big is that problem right now? Not very big. How is it affecting me? It's not. How big will it get? I don't know, but since you do know that, could you also peer into the future and tell me the winning Loot ticket number up next?

Cathy, you like to worry, you like to bring your worries to this board. So be it. But not everyone needs to share your point of view.

[CathyA]

Wow......thanks Iris Lily. That was helpful.

[JaneV2.0]

Nurse Kaci Hickox is free and en route to her home state, where she will be monitored. Common sense triumphs over political posturing.

[kib]

SPOLIER ALERT***** I'm about to go radical and take an anti-Obama stance.....

Seriously, I don't understand the refusal to temporarily end flight service from West Africa - at least from Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia - into the United States. I just don't get it to the point where I wish on this one (just this one) issue we had Romney in office instead - yes, I said it (!!!!!) as I do believe under Romney these flights would have been by now suspended until further notice - better control/eradication of the virus. I've lost some faith in Obama for not ending these flights, I really have.

I also believe that we don't fully know all the means by which this virus is transmitted and that the government is not admitting this, which I find very off putting to say the least. I also believe that this will (probably) die off and not become this horrible thing that many seem to fear but that before this happens there will be a lot of political theater and drama. Nothing new on this last. Rob

Rob, my deep and extensive knowledge gleaned from driving around town listening to NPR tells me this is the logic: most US airports are not temperature screening their arriving passengers. There are loads of ways to get into the country without a direct flight from one of the infected nations. So if they ban flights from, say, Liberia, people in Liberia who want to get to the US might for example fly to Quebec and then Cleveland. They would, inadvertently, avoid being screened at all. Maintaining a straight route where everyone gets screened appears to be a safer course of action.

[bae]

Well....