Distrust in government is not only located in minority neighborhoods. It’s all over in this climate. I saw a news show about 2 weeks ago on contract tracing where they were interviewing the tracers.. from upper to middle to lower class.. from Harvard to the inner city of Philadelphia. They were having a impossible time of getting the information they needed because so many weren’t going along with it.
Doesn’t matter the size of the state, it’s the commitment from the people wanting to do the right thing.
You must be confusing me with someone else. Of course it is easier to trace with fewer people. That’s common sense. But if those few people didn’t go along with it then things would be the same like other places. If it’s done in a state with double or triple the amount of people, it still wouldn’t matter if the people wanted to be part of the bigger picture and helped out. The biggest problem, and this is my opinion, is a lot of people feel, in some deranged way, that their rights are being compromised in some way. Like the big mask thing.I’ll say it again, if people are committed it can be done. Or could have been done.. I also wonder if that ship has sailed.
Those death numbers just won’t budge. Why?!
What do you suggest CP?
Well, instead of half-assing the contact tracing (I read in another thread on here that Florida is only doing 25% of the contact tracing it should be...why even bother?), especially in light of so many people being resistant to it, let’s use those funds for other things - funnel it into unemployment, buying extra PPE for at-risk individuals, hazard pay for essential workers. If contact tracing is working really well in states like Vermont, that’s great and they should keep at it. But if it’s still not working in other places seven months into this whole thing, let’s try something else.
Was it state or federal money in Vermont? That’s the problem, it’s a 50 state free for all.
Wow. Thanks for putting words in my mouth. I’m glad you see what everyone believes and thinks here. I never said one sentence that you credited to me. If you want someone’s feelings on something ask. We all know what happens when we assume.
Being a small, not particularly densely populated state helps, but our case rate per 100,000 people is still the lowest in the country, at 281. For comparison, Florida is the 3rd worst in this matter at 3,290.
And I agree with some of your reasons. Now we are connecting! My point is that there’s to many people that believe those reasons, right or wrong, that we can’t possibly do it efficiently. On occasion, like Vermont you can see it’s working. But for every Vermont there’s another 35 that it’s not working in. You think the reason is because it’s smaller and easier to trace. That’s part of it as I said before. But Iill stuck by my opinion and it’s being proven over and over.
Just do what the government officials tell you to do Komrad. You don't need no rights. Independent thought and logic are not authorized.
Vermont is 37th in population density, though. That means the 23 states that are less densely populated are doing worse for case rates, some by over an order of magnitude.
Instead of half-assing contact tracing maybe they should have just tried doing it right.
We don’t live in that world by choice. There were proposals to require employers to provide paid sick leave for anyone who had to quarantine. We could have passed that into law. “We” chose not to. Instead you are saying since we don’t have that it’s Ok for people to go to work when they are sick or potentially sick if they need the money. That’s part of the reason things are how they are. The only way to slow the virus down is to isolate sick people (which is hard given asymptomatic spread - hence the need for testing and tracing) and follow things like masks, social distancing, no large group gatherings and limit indoor activities without masks (dining/bars). I do understand that some people could care less about slowing the virus spread because they don’t think it’s a serious threat, but that’s a whole different issue.
Florida has done a lot more testing per capita than Vermont because there were a lot more sick people. There has been widespread community spread for a long period of time now. Percent positive gives us a good indication of whether enough testing is being done. What’s the percent positive in VT vs FL? Did they have long stretches of time over 5% in VT? If Vermont wasn’t doing enough testing and that’s why they have less cases then their percent positive would be high (over 5%) instead of 0.2%...not 2%...0.2%. As of a few weeks ago Vermont hadn’t had a Covid death since the end of July and only had a handful of people still hospitalized. Deaths and hospitalizations can’t be skewed by more testing or lack of testing.
abcnews.go.com
