Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

A rational goal would be to balance "risk and reward" and close down higher risk activities that are not severe penalties so as to keep hospitals up and running.

In a more general sense, we each have individual risk/reward goals, but the problem is that our own individual risk/reward matrix very rarely accounts for externalities. 

A healthy 23-year-old with no comorbid conditions who wants to go to the bar with his friends to watch his alma mater's football game is making a risk/reward calculation. It's that his enjoyment of the event is worth the risk of catching COVID-19, a disease which has very low probability of hurting him in any significant way. 

But with something like COVID, the degree of community spread causes risk to FAR more people than just he and his buddies, unless everyone in that bar lives alone and immediately goes home to a bubble for 2 weeks afterwards. Which of course isn't going to happen. The guys who is an unknowing asymptomatic contagious carrier who thinks he's only risking himself and his buddies may not be taking into account the risk to his waitress trying to earn a living but who lives with her 88-year-old grandmother. Why would that risk enter his calculation? He doesn't know that risk even exists. 

The rational goal is to try to preserve as much economic activity as we can while minimizing community spread. Part of that is that we ask everyone to take part in taking precautions and not doing things which will unfairly burden society by increasing community spread for frivolities. But instead, somewhere between 350-400K people decided that going to a motorcycle rally and not taking precautions was essential. 

In a more general sense, we each have individual risk/reward goals, but the problem is that our own individual risk/reward matrix very rarely accounts for externalities.

A healthy 23-year-old with no comorbid conditions who wants to go to the bar with his friends to watch his alma mater's football game is making a risk/reward calculation. It's that his enjoyment of the event is worth the risk of catching COVID-19, a disease which has very low probability of hurting him in any significant way.

But with something like COVID, the degree of community spread causes risk to FAR more people than just he and his buddies, unless everyone in that bar lives alone and immediately goes home to a bubble for 2 weeks afterwards. Which of course isn't going to happen. The guys who is an unknowing asymptomatic contagious carrier who thinks he's only risking himself and his buddies may not be taking into account the risk to his waitress trying to earn a living but who lives with her 88-year-old grandmother. Why would that risk enter his calculation? He doesn't know that risk even exists.

The rational goal is to try to preserve as much economic activity as we can while minimizing community spread. Part of that is that we ask everyone to take part in taking precautions and not doing things which will unfairly burden society by increasing community spread for frivolities. But instead, somewhere between 350-400K people decided that going to a motorcycle rally and not taking precautions was essential.

Or millions of people marching, protesting and also, some being violent and destructive. But that’s more than ok right?

I don't think any of the protests (Huntington Beach maskless protests of beach closures, various states' maskless protests to "liberate" from lockdowns, most of the thankfully masked protests of Floyd/BLM) were particularly smart. And the violence and looting in some of the protests is inexcusable regardless of COVID. 

But it's a false equivalence when you compare organized and sponsored events such as universities/leagues hosting sporting events [especially with fans] or cities' hosting motorcycle rallies.  

Large groups of people, whether a protest or a rally, are irresponsible as it relates to community spread. But only one is officially sanctioned, hosted, and encouraged by an entity. 

But instead, somewhere between 350-400K people decided that going to a motorcycle rally and not taking precautions was essential.

Some things are not controllable by governments, like protests etc.  There is no way to suppress or discourage some large gathering of that ilk especially by folks who don't care for government in large part.

I imagine every President at times would like to be a dictator.  Of course then they couldn't try and blame "the other side" for what went wrong.

I imagine every President at times would like to be a dictator.  Of course then they couldn't try and blame "the other side" for what went wrong.

Don't limit it to presidents.
I think there's a little dictator inside most politicians.
Their three big motivations for entering politics are money, sex, and power.

I imagine it's true for second lieutenants too, presuming they aren't wondering around lost.

The lust for control is a human trait.

If I were in charge ....