# Did Trump Administration Fire the US Pandemic Response Team?



## ChibiMofo (Mar 12, 2020)

It is 100% true. He fired all of them back in 2018. You see when you give a $1.5 trillion handout to the richest Americans, you have to cut back somewhere. He chose to put us all at risk, and play Russian roulette with our health:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-fire-pandemic-team/

Never forget that Hillary got 3 *million *more votes. No one but Russia and racists wanted this scumbag.


----------



## Hanafuda (Mar 13, 2020)

The 2019 Global Health Security Index (over a year after those people were fired) found the United States to be the most prepared nation on the planet, across 6 categories of consideration. And by a decent margin over the #2 country.






Firing people doesn't make things worse if those people suck at their job.

ghsindex.org


----------



## osaka35 (Mar 13, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> The 2019 Global Health Security Index (over a year after those people were fired) found the United States to be the most prepared nation on the planet, across 6 categories of consideration. And by a decent margin over the #2 country.
> 
> View attachment 199330
> 
> ...


I agree. And as much as I agree with the sentiment of the OP, i'm not sure if keeping these positions would have helped. To be clear, the administration didn't just fire them, they didn't replace them, essentially removing the positions themselves. They also removed the bits about us helping other countries shore up their ability to prevent such diseases. like china. So. I mean. It's not like it's a binary "this would have prevented this" scenario. It's possible it might have prevented it happening if it was just a lab accident gone awry (one of the many many many theories I've read), but I doubt it would have greatly changed stuff. 

But this is a social issue. This virus has at least shown how essential it is we consider medicine and health a social necessity, one we all contribute to and rely on.


----------



## JayMathis (Mar 13, 2020)

ChibiMofo said:


> It is 100% true. He fired all of them back in 2018. You see when you give a $1.5 trillion handout to the richest Americans, you have to cut back somewhere. He chose to put us all at risk, and play Russian roulette with our health:
> https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-fire-pandemic-team/
> 
> Never forget that Hillary got 3 *million *more votes. No one but Russia and racists wanted this scumbag.



You say "we" did U.S. take over Canada? Or are you using a VPN?


----------



## cracker (Mar 13, 2020)

Not sure if they are using a VPN, but you don't need to use a VPN when you set your country yourself.

I'm not sure how much it will come back on Trump. Guess we need to wait and see how our average compares. On the bright side, it is showing the naysayers how much our health system is broken and how much we need Medicare For All. Events such as these don't discriminate based on wealth or skin color. Maybe sit-ins of those infected on Wall Street, etc would push it over the edge... </salty>


----------



## notimp (Mar 13, 2020)

Hindsight is 20/20. Obviously not the best idea. Even back then. But lynching them now for it.. You must really scold them for not understanding probability. 

Which eh... with that administration..? 

So here is the deeper issue. You could obviously reform your pandemic team, once the news broke. So thats not the problem.

The problem is, that you loose institutional expertise (and f.e. response plans), if you do so (dismantle them) for a long time. So the issue is forgotten institutional knowledge, if you get rid of institutions.

You can still have that knowledge be present at the university level, but to then integrate it into government again - comes with its challenges (takes time).

In the mean time, during non-pandemic periods ( ), you have them sit by idly - and pay them to research some strand, or think about distribution curves and patterns, which you could, very easily mistake for empty spending.

If you wanted a "simple and lean government". Which to be fair, Trump campaigned on.

Deswamping the swamp was his way of saying, fire all those useless bureaucrats, that only cost money, remember.

No, please - remember that. For future reference.

Because this time, the impact of him firing the response team was probably still not that huge. The plans were still in some drawers (and be it at the UN). But that would have changed over time (regional response efforts from 'the fifties?' at some point).


----------



## Taleweaver (Mar 13, 2020)

@ChibiMofo : I don't want to frighten you, but you should really read "The fifth risk" by Lewis. Dismantling or removing parts of the government Trump doesn't deem necessary is basically what he does. We've already seen how that turned out on hurricane forecasts, you're going to see it now how the lack of a pandemic response team is going to pan out and unless there's a quick shift you're going to see what consequences chopping up the nuclear disposal program will do to the environment.

@Hanafuda: we have our differences, but I gotta admit that's a well documented and reliable source. Still...


Hanafuda said:


> Firing people doesn't make things worse if those people suck at their job.


You've got a reliable source on this one? It seems to me that in the absence of a pandemic in 2018, it's very hard to judge whether or not they were doing their job correctly.


----------



## ChibiMofo (Mar 16, 2020)

A little over a week ago Trump and FauxNews were calling the coronavirus nothing but a liberal conspiracy that was being hyped by the media. Nevermind that FauxNews is _the _media for 99% of morons.


----------



## notimp (May 21, 2020)

"There is a coalition of doctors who are extremely pro-Trump that have been preparing and coming together for the war ahead in the campaign on health care. And these doctors could be activated for this conversation now."

Nancy Schulze
Republican Party Strategist

src:

at the 3 minutes mark.



Trump threatening to cut funding to swing states that would allow for mail-in voting at 5min10sec in.


----------

