I imagine in terms of medical care access and affordability or welfare stimulus, practically negligible, but in terms of CDC funding, science literacy, public policy, and general preparedness, it would be a whole lot better put together.

So I'd say... 10% fewer deaths? 200K vs. 220K deaths sounds about right.

  • Chombombsky [he/him]
    ·
    4 years ago

    All the lower governments rely heavily on guidence from the feds

      • Chombombsky [he/him]
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 years ago

        Common sense. Small municipalites arent going to have their own virologists on hand to help guide policy.

        • hagensfohawk [none/use name]
          ·
          4 years ago

          That doesn't changed the fundamental issue. The feds lack the authority to enforce any guidelines that they set. They have to be enforced at a local level.

          Do you really think that rural counties or Ron Desantis would be enforcing guidelines set by Hillary's HHS?

          • Chombombsky [he/him]
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 years ago

            A random county in bumfuck idaho really doesn't matter. However most counties will adhere to the state, who will mostly adhere to the feds. You'll find differences amongst municipalities, sure, but with something like a pandemic going on, ignoring federal guidance would put you in the minority

            • hagensfohawk [none/use name]
              ·
              4 years ago

              It's not some random bumfuck county in Idaho, it's any office held by Republicans across the entire country

    • DonCheadleInTheWH [any]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      Exactly. There would have been allocated resources and personnel dispatched immediately.