comment by user-inactivated

a thoughtful web.

Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!

user-inactivated · 1825 days ago · link · · parent · post: I think we might be going from "correction" to "panic selling"

Individual states are demonstrating themselves to be vastly more agile than the CDC (probably because they haven't been hollowed out by 3 years of toadyism).

Not just disease, but natural disaster in general? Isn't that the argument for better state funds for response over federal, for like hurricanes and floods and all? Just for familiarity of the area and people and all alone, I'm more confident in my local disaster response team than any team the federal government would send over.

Edit: And I can imagine, in general, smaller teams and organizations and specialized are more agile and responsive than larger teams.

markup tips · 0

kleinbl00 · 1825 days ago · link ·

The argument is that natural disasters cost more than state funds allow so federal funds are necessary to bridge the gap. In this case, the CDC should be coordinating response but we're at "heckuvajob Brownie."

+discuss+discuss

–

user-inactivated · 1825 days ago · link ·

Sorry. Maybe I was unclear. I was asking, isn't the argument for better funding states for disaster response is that they're better able to respond to local disasters because they're local organizations?

+discuss+discuss

–

kleinbl00 · 1825 days ago · link ·

It is. The counter argument is that a bad disaster will bankrupt a state. Further, the counter argument is that a national response allows for greater coordination of resources and dissipation of burden but the CDC ain't doin' that at all.