Hacker News Reader

Comment by fma | Hacker News Reader

Agreed. And where is Trump's response? We don't even have enough testing kits. We had 2 months to ramp things up.

Relying solely on the federal government for a response is a single point of failure. Regardless of who is in control of the FDA and CDC, neither agency should have had the ability to block testing. Not having a breakglass feature is downright stupid.

At least he closed the borders. Russia as well. EU can't even do that.

He did it in an ineffective way. US nationals were returning from the EU without any screening. And it was way too late. All a bunch of xenophobia theater.

Though I agree with your criticism in broad strokes, this is also a numbers game. If it reduced the number of infected people entering then it was useful. It doesn't have to completely eliminate it to be worth doing.

There are legal and logistical challenges in preventing US residents from entering or imposing quarantine.

Would strong or (more importantly) earlier responses have been good? Absolutely! But a weak and late response is much better than an even later response (even if the later response is stronger).

By the numbers we should prefer a non-US-resident ban-- even without screening/quarantine-- on day 20 than a everyone-ban on day 40.

Several EU countries have already closed or will be closing their sovereign borders in the next 24 hours. They can do that. They are doing it.

The China travel ban went into effect 6 weeks ago. Italy, South Korea, and Japan followed not too long after.

He was even called a dictator for that.

Correction: South Korea & Japan were "do not travel" not specific travel bans.

Wait, I hope you are joking because you are spreading misinformation. Japan and Korea were NEVER banned. China was and Italy was just a few days ago.

Japan: level 2 (exercise caution) https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...

Korea:level 3 (reconsider) https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...

My mistake. You are correct. They weren't travel bans but "don't go there" recommendations.

Regardless, they're still a response which refutes your original point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com