People want action. Part of this circumstance now is finally dealing with financial practices that are unsustainable because we are in a financial pickle. Fixing bad administrations is now possible. Expensive programs such as health, education can finally be collapsed and redone more efficiently with considerably less cost. That is making something good out of a bad situation. Then there is doing something bad in a bad situation – like holding the nation hostage so we fund international health programs, or vastly expand and finance medical programs that address future global pandemics. This is not a good time for that. That is a discussion for after the election, and after lifting the lockdown. Our focus here is getting the US back to work and solving this existing health crisis, after we know more about what it is. IT appears to be an intentionally widespread bioattack intended to shutdown the economy since Birz and Fauci would implement the lockdown protocol of China. Their thinking is we need to plan and supply any future pandemic, no matter from where it comes: a power play by globalists to control all health, paid for by us.
This lockdown is bad policy, and should not have been used here. It is not necessary for this virus at all. The questions to put to Birx and Fauci:
- The dishonesty in reporting the lethality of this virus was intentional. Now that actual statistics are available from a Santa Clara study that shows the lethality to be similar if not less than the flu (actually known by P Trump early on), why are we treating this like the Spanish Flu that had 40M deaths, when this is far less lethal, and in fact ought to be an embarassment that a lockdown was employed. This was a major crime, misrepresenting this virus in this manner by the Chinese, WHO, and possibly Birx and Fauci. Shouldn’t the lockdown be lifted?
- Was the damage to Americans from the lockdown considered? Loss of employment, uncertainty, financial destitution, even possible starvation ,… even in areas that have few cases. the diminishment of life is also a loss. just deaths from despair are larger than that of the virus. So why the lockdown?
- In those areas with few cases no lockdown is needed. they can actually track and quaratine people on a cases by case basis with no lockdown. Other areas with larger numbers cannot do this and obviously here the spread rate is the main factor, so they can have treatment. This too can be done without a lockdown. So why the lockdown?
These questions are not being asked and if asked, they are not being answered.