Friday, April 16, 2021
Bill King Blog
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Bill
  • Policy Discussion
  • Categories
  • Tune in
  • Home
  • About Bill
  • Policy Discussion
  • Categories
  • Tune in
No Result
View All Result
Bill King Blog
No Result
View All Result
Home COVID-19

Quote of the Week – “Better Safe than Sorry”

by Bill King
April 9, 2020
in COVID-19, Demographics, Economics, Ethics, Quote of the Week
1
mother scolding child (2)
Share this article
  • 22
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    22
    Shares

“It is better to be safe than sorry.”  Our mothers’ admonition rings in every one of our ears.  And it is an apt one for children unable to appreciate and weigh risks.  But the reality is that we live in a world full of risks.  Every day we take risks, most of which could be avoided, as a tradeoff for something we need or want.  We do it on an individual and a societal level.

For example, we know that there are virtually no traffic fatalities at speeds of less than 30 mph.  So, if we reduced the speed limit to 30 mph, we would save nearly all of the roughly 40,000 people in the US that die in car accidents each year.  If we were to put lowering the speed limit to 30 mph up for a vote, what do you think the result would be?

Or how about smoking.  According to the CDC, “cigarette smoking is responsible for more than 480,000 deaths per year in the United States, including more than 41,000 deaths resulting from secondhand smoke exposure. This is about one in five deaths annually, or 1,300 deaths every day.”  If we pass an outright ban on smoking, we could save nearly a half a million unnecessary deaths each year.  

Globally, two million people die every year in work-related accidents.  Should we shut down the world economy forever to save these two million lives?

The reality is that we put ourselves and others at risk every day for our livelihood, our convenience and our personal pleasure.  Implicit in those decisions is the uncomfortable calculus that we will tolerate some number of people dying as a trade-off for a variety of activities we undertake every day.

Of course, this is on my mind because of the current COVID-19 outbreak and various government restrictions that have been put in place to stem its spread.  At some point we will have to face the question of what level of COVID-19 risk we are willing to assume. 

It is a calculus that we have already made when it comes to seasonal flu.  Before COVID-19, the CDC  estimated there would be 24,000-63,000 flu deaths this year in the U.S.  If we had adopted the same social distancing and stay-at-home protocols measures at the beginning of the flu season, a large percentage of those deaths could be avoided.  But if anyone would have suggested those measures at the beginning of flu season, they would have been laughed out of the room.

There are those who will attempt to portray the dilemma before us as a choice between saving lives and measly pecuniary interests.  I saw someone on social media recently say they would rather be poor and have their grandparents.  If it were only that simple.

Yes, of course, there are financial implications.  But they are not just about lowering our standard of living.  There are families that literally will not be able to feed themselves at some point under these restrictions.  Individuals will forego medical treatment because they cannot afford it, with unknowable consequences.  How many middle-class families will have their savings wiped out?  How many of their children will not be able to go to college as a result?  How many pension plans will go bankrupt because of the market collapse, leaving pensioners destitute? 

But beyond the financial impact, there will also be unintended consequences from these measures we cannot even contemplate now.  For example, there were about 48,000 suicides last year.  My guess is that when we get those numbers for this year, we will see a big spike.  Alcohol sales have shot up.  How many more alcoholics will there be at the end of this?  Many expect there will be a surge in family violence.  How many cancers are not being diagnosed early enough to save a person’s life because routine screenings have been shut down.

The list of potential consequences is endless.

Hopefully, the course of the disease over the next couple of weeks will make the calculus less difficult.  If not, we will soon be facing some tough decisions.  But regardless of the exigency of the circumstance when that time comes, hopefully we will make those decisions with our gray matter and not our glands.

______________________________________

Photograph by Rolland Hendrickson (1925-2014), Mother Scolds Her Daughter.

Share22Tweet

Bill King

Related Posts

US COVID Data Update –Fatalities Continue to Fall while Other Metrics Plateau
COVID-19

US COVID Data Update –Fatalities Continue to Fall while Other Metrics Plateau

April 12, 2021
Update on Texas COVID Stats – No Surge in Sight
COVID-19

Update on Texas COVID Stats – No Surge in Sight

April 5, 2021
US COVID Data Update – Decline is Slowing but Vaccinations are Off the Charts
COVID-19

US COVID Data Update – Decline is Slowing but Vaccinations are Off the Charts

March 29, 2021
Fatalities in the US Were 18% Higher in 2020 Than 2019
COVID-19

Fatalities in the US Were 18% Higher in 2020 Than 2019

March 26, 2021
Update on Texas COVID Stats – Epidemic Continues to Wind Down
COVID-19

Update on Texas COVID Stats – Epidemic Continues to Wind Down

March 21, 2021
US COVID Data Update – All Metrics Continue to Grind Lower while Vaccinations Accelerate
COVID-19

US COVID Data Update – All Metrics Continue to Grind Lower while Vaccinations Accelerate

March 15, 2021
Load More
Next Post

COVID-19 Statistics – Update No. 5

Comments 1

  1. Herman says:
    1 year ago

    I suppose a valid question would be, if we had not implemented restrictive (stay at home) measures, how many fatalities would we have. Then weigh that against how many we have WITH the costly restrictive measures and determine if the benefit (lives saved) is worth the cost (economic and social impact of social distancing.)

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

By Categories

  • Book Review
  • City Of Houston Finances
  • Climate Change
  • COVID-19
  • Crime
  • Demographics
  • Economics
  • Election Reform
  • Environment
  • Ethics
  • Faith
  • Federal Government Finances
  • Flooding
  • Harris County
  • Harvey Recovery
  • homeblog
  • Human Trafficking
  • Hurricane Preparation
  • Ike Dike
  • Immigration
  • Kingwood
  • Management Districts
  • Media
  • Mobility
  • Montrose Management District
  • National Economy
  • National Economy
  • National Politics
  • Pensions
  • Police Polices & Procedures
  • Police Policies & Procedures
  • Political Parties
  • Property Taxes
  • Public Health
  • Quote of the Week
  • Race
  • Rebuild Houston
  • Rebuild Houston – Drainage Fee
  • Social Security
  • State of Texas
  • State of Texas Finances
  • TIRZ
  • Uncategorized
  • Uptown
  • Utility Grid
Bill King Blog

Posts range from local to national issues and focus on fact-based analysis, avoiding hyperbole and partisanship. The site is intended to be an open, respectful discussion of the critical issues of our day. Contact Bill directly and let him know what matters to you - weking@weking.net

Recent News

  • US COVID Data Update –Fatalities Continue to Fall while Other Metrics Plateau
  • Update on Texas COVID Stats – No Surge in Sight

Our Social Media

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Bill
  • Policy Discussion
  • Categories
  • Tune in