If I was granted three wishes
If I was granted three wishes here is what I would do:
- I would wish for term limits for Federal Congressional service. Total combined time in House and the Senate would be 10 years.
- Campaigning for the Presidency, the Senate and the House would be limited to the four months prior to the election.
- Total campaign spending would be limited to the following: $1 per population over 18. For President it would be the national population, for the Senate it would be the state and for the House it would be the District. Only donations from individuals would be allowed and they would be limited to $500 per person. Super Pacs would be gone.
What is a life Worth?
I have no idea, but I do know that we have spent millions (and in some cases tens of millions) to save the life of a person that has gone missing. Unfortunately, in most cases these attempts may have located the missing person, but did not save their life. I realize that it may not be popular to view the recent pandemic in economic terms, but here goes. We have spent over $6 trillion over 15 months with the idea that it would assist aid the economy while we were saving lives. Where we failed was with our ineffective approach to containing the virus. The facts we that we spent more money per capita than countries like New Zealand, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. At the same time all of these countries experienced less impact on their per capita GDP and higher levels of employment than the USA.
What is depressing is that, on average, these countries experienced COVID related per capita mortality rates that were about 1/20th that of our country. We spent more to save fewer lives. What would have been worth to save over a half million lives. Assuming an arbitrary value of a million dollars per life it would be worth $500 billion. We spent a lot more than that and failed, in my opinion.
Sweden & their approach to COVID 19
“As societies battened down the hatches and imposed quarantines, one European country appeared to take a different approach. In Sweden, there have been no invasive lockdowns to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus. Restaurants and even nightclubs are operating, though under guidelines to enforce social distancing. Schools for students under the age of 16 remain open. Large gatherings are restricted to a maximum of 50 people, a far cry from the enforced confinement imposed on entire cities in other parts of Europe.
These seemingly lax measures attracted the attention of lockdown skeptics elsewhere, who hailed the “Swedish model” as an example of how a Western democracy ought to deal with the pandemic. It became a cause celebre among American conservatives, who resent the economic toll exacted by social distancing restrictions. Even for nonconservatives, the Swedish approach is now being invoked as an obvious “alternative” to what prevails. New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman suggested this weekend that President Trump may hope to “follow Sweden” as he seeks to “reopen” the American economy”
And then in November
“The Swedish government announced strict upcoming coronavirus-related restrictions amid rising case numbers, even though the Scandinavian nation didn’t lock down earlier during the pandemic.
Prime Minister Stefan Lofven announced the new restrictions on Monday during a press conference, according to Business Insider. The restrictions include limiting the size of public gatherings and halting fans from attending concerts, performances, and sports matches. Schools, workplaces, and private gatherings are not included in the ban.
In-person gatherings, which were allowed as long as they were less than 50 people, will now be cut to a maximum of eight people.”
“It is a clear and sharp signal to every person in our country as to what applies in the future. Don’t go to the gym. Don’t go to the library. Don’t have dinner out. Don’t have parties — cancel!” Lofven explained. “It’s going to get worse.”