Again tonight — with a British article — claiming it proves (what he claims was too harsh an) American approach… killed people needlessly.

He’s right, but in precisely the opposite way of that which he… imagines. It was Trump’s non-approach that has now killed nearly 176,000 — and will certainly kill more than 200,000 by mid Fall 2020. I’ll repeat my last one on this, below. [But John does admit now that we will see it with us, for many years to come. I guess that’s… progress(?) of a sort, on John’s part. I dunno.]

Cheers, moron.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

John Hinderaker tried to say… something… something… about his COVID-dissonance, tonight.

He decided to cut and paste some goofy charts made by a far right think tank’s doctor/talking head for (get this!) the supremacy of free enterprise… to suggest (falsely, of course) that the efforts to flatten the curve killed more than a “no approach at all” would have.

Uh-huh. He assumes a whole library of “facts” not anywhere in evidence, or even in… existence. [Common sense tells us that we cannot know — collectively — with any confidence, what a path we did not take would have looked like.]

He offers… Sweden, as his “woulda’ coulda’ shoulda‘” model. That’s preposterous — as I detailed when Paul M. tried it, about 30 days ago.

More concretely, he ignores, among other things, that with a nationalized health care system in Sweden, people there are generally far more healthy (via a better starting base) than the average American. He ignores that the Swedes are about 30 per cent wealthier — and ten years younger, on average than the average American, in no small part because the Swedes receive various benefits (like health) essentially without regard to anyone’s ability to pay for it.

There are only about 10 million Swedes in that country, and thus the pool he looks at is 1/30^th the size of the US. It is thinner, younger, smokes less and shares a strong sense of united national identity.

But from this comparison of “fish, to bicycles“… he comically “deduces” that a “no lockdowns” scenario, nationwide, would have saved us many net lives, in the US. The main problem is… in his own chart… no less… he blithely ignores the Texas data — which (as his goofy doctor points out)… was (mostly) a no lockdowns approach.

And now it is a runaway kill-box. If there is any microcosm / comparator, John — for your argument — it is… Texas.

And it proves… almost conclusively… based on all data since July 15, 2020… that more people are dead because of it.

Moron. See your own chart. But use both inductive reasoning, and some bio-science — as well as some math skills, next time. What a chuckle-head.