Irish-Americans survived ultra-racist NINA job discrimination and drunken-simian political cartoon libel (https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/01/28/irish-apes-...) in the late 19th and early 20th century, to joining the contemporary American "white monolith". It's an interesting and silenced American immigrant story.

So, which is it?

The common thread seems to be economic status as another commenter stated.

Even if our logic is faulty, the reality is that people have come to these conclusions in large minority status in this poll: https://www.npr.org/2020/09/19/914233038/poll-climate-become....

The number of distrust has doubled, from 14% in March to 29% in September. So it's possible there is merit and momentum to my reasoning, that government should be transparent and avoid mischaracterization (or the appearance of it) and irresponsibility.

In the article I linked to, the surgeon general said masks were not effective. This is false. They are effective (along with non-N95 masks).

The data on shortages did not need to be remedied with a mischaracterization of PPE's effectiveness. It could have been communicated as I previously suggested, stating, "we messed up and need donations from the world." This would have increased institutional trust (being honest about the situation), and perhaps supported more uniform mask usage in the long-run.

The original mischaracterization and subsequent defense of this communication choice remains a cause of institutional mistrust. And even if you don't agree, you must be able to sympathize with the logic behind this conclusion for others. In fact, two other replies to your first comment similarly agreed with me.

Agree with this statement, however it does not apply here. There was no new data. They always knew that masks worked, but they needed them for first responders. Confirmation of this from Fauci interview: https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-mask-advice-was-becaus...

The responsible, accountable thing to do would have been to say to Americans, "these masks do work, but we need them for first responders, please donate yours!"

The US surgeon general and Fauci told people to stop buying masks. Then they reversed themselves, and defended their position at the time.

Media reports "fiery, but mostly peaceful protests".

What intelligent person would trust institutions that are inconsistent and refuse accountability? What intelligent person can cope with the dissonance of arson = peace? Can you blame distrust given this environment?

> So the question becomes is this a violation of the bill of rights?

Seems less like an issue of being "left" and more "authoritarian". I wish there was a pithier word than "Auth" available for this. Some left-wingers still defend the 1st Amendment.

I hope the parties this decree impacts sue and bring this to the Supreme Court. The biggest issue with lockdowns now seems to be lawmakers' fear of making a deadly choice. We need a high court opinion to be clear on what government can and cannot do. IANAL but the language seems clear in 1A that there shall be no law restricting peaceable assembly.

This was historically not the case. There is a movie "The Business of Being Born" which emphasizes midwives in childbirth. It's important to know about this idea before conceiving, because you cannot change your OB after a certain number of weeks, at which point you are on the hospitalization conveyor belt.

Caveat emptor, I am a man, and my wife preferred hospitalization, and if you have medical problems it makes sense to be in a hospital. But if you are healthy and young, you have options. Given the pandemic, it could possibly be safer, on balance, to deliver at home or in a non-hospital facility. A migration to this less expensive model would also save money for new families and beds for the critically ill, such as in this pandemic.

> Having lived in San Francisco for years with children, I would very much like to get a three bedroom two bathroom home, but the cheapest places that are reasonably safe are in the $1.3 million range and up.

I think a lot of people in the upper middle class that read Hacker News are focused on maintaining their status and driving education (and land value increases) from school districts. I myself have made this choice and live in a very high cost suburb with a great school district. But that does not mean these amenities are necessary to have more children. I grew up in a blue collar village and while I graduated college and have some post-graduate coursework, most of my skills have been self-taught. I have often found, albeit anecdotally, that children placed into these districts and affluent situations tend to be less self-reliant and creative than the intelligent peers I grew up with from similar backgrounds. A lot of the worry about educational outcomes is driven by values imparted by strong parenting - my parents did not have much when I was young, but they imparted work ethic and emphasized enrichment outside of the organized classroom. Sometimes I regret moving to my affluent neighborhood because my children will learn less resilience due to less adversity. But I am not moving, so I don't really regret it.

My point is that there can be successful Americans from all walks of life and all levels of income due to the meritocratic nature of our nation and strong values in the home and surrounding community. Needing an expensive location with great schools can be helpful but overall is unnecessary. I have friends in a smaller city, one a developer and one a teacher, who own a $190k 4BR house and have safety and good schools. Their child is smart because they spend time and impart values. It is different because tradeoffs are made in potential income and budget decisions. But it is not necessarily harder.

https://www.cell.com/trends/pharmacological-sciences/referen...