This is not a conspiracy theory, it's proof

You get 1 shot, we get 50.

A lot of people both left and right have been claiming that the coronavirus is a trial run for martial law.  That's crazy, it's an existential threat and proper precautions need to be taken.  What the coronavirus actually is, is proof that decentralization works better than centralization.  It's proof of the argument against totalitarianism.  And the proof has nothing to do directly with China.

With Democrats arguing that president Trump needs to take radical action, evidence suggests otherwise.  Take centralization to the point of absurdity - one world government.  If there was a centrally planned response, in that scenario the world would have to pray that the response was the correct one.  Otherwise the fatalities and other impacts could be catastrophic to an epic degree.  Imagine that the world was run by Italy instead of South Korea.  The infection rate and fatalities would be far worse.

Years ago I was arguing what I called the 50 Experiments Theorem.  50 states trying 50 different approaches to combat the virus is better than the federal government mandating one approach for all - one approach that could very well be quite a bad approach. The idea is that the more things that are tried the more chances you have one of your experiments being successful, and everyone else having the opportunity to copy the successful approach and learn from the failed approaches too.   More broadly there are over 170 countries, so that offers a lot more experiments.  Those who are in favor of globalism and opposed to decentralization argue for political homogeneity (whether purposefully or accidentally).  They argue for one experiment in times of crisis.  That is an extremely high risk approach.  

Five years from now, scientist and planners will have learned what countries reacted smartly and which ones did not.  Those learnings can be applied more universally to the inevitable next outbreak.  That's a good thing, isn't it?

Decentralization means more chances to solve problems because it means more people trying more things and offers a higher chance of a successful result.  By extension, that is proof that capitalism will always work better than socialism to solve society's problems.  It always allows for more people trying more things because they have the freedom to try.  

More politicizing Hurricane Sandy

Elections can wait...

Yesterday I postulated that the impact of Hurricane Sandy would be used as an excuse for Obama's impending loss in the 2012 election (after the fact). I neglected to consider that liberals would try to use the storm as a time out on the election clock countdown.

WASHINGTON (AP) - One week before a close election, superstorm Sandy has confounded the presidential race, halted early voting in many areas and led some to ponder whether the election might even be postponed.

It could take days to restore electricity to more than 8 million homes and businesses that lost power when the storm pummeled the East Coast. That means it's possible power could still be out in parts of some states on Election Day next Tuesday - a major problem for precincts that rely on electronic voting machines.

But as the storm breached the coast, even some of those intimately involved in the election seemed in the dark about what options are available to cope with the storm. Asked Monday whether President Barack Obama had the power to reschedule the election, White House press secretary Jay Carney said he wasn't sure.

Not sure? The real storm is going to be a GOP tsunami on election day, and trying to postpone it for voters to 'come to their senses' and return to Obama, is an act of desperation.  A few facts - the storm has had a major impact in a relative small geographic portion of the country.  New York and New Jersey are locks for Obama already, as is most of New England.  The impact in a swing state like Ohio is not enough to justify making special considerations there.  In other words, the impact on the outcome of the election is negligible unless a lengthy delay could actually help Obama.  It's the equivalent of a do-over but before the fact.

One last consideration for liberals to ponder.  If this was 2008 and Bush were president and his press secretary Dana Perino said that she didn't know whether Bush had the power to reschedule an election you would be screaming Martial Law and bloody murder over it.

There is ZERO justification for delaying the election.  Disenfranchising voters is peanuts compared to moving the goal posts or changing the rules right before the end of the game.  That's pure manipulation.