Right now, some Democrats are mulling over pushing new COVID restrictions over the scary “Delta variant.” Some counties and even a state or two, want to go back to demanding people wear masks. Some fear they might go back to even stricter rules.
But the moves obviously contradict their own narrative: that the vaccine works and should be taken by all. If the vaccine is so effective, why are Democrats punishing people who have complied and received the jab?
More than that, it’s worth taking a look at all the bogus restrictions and mandates states forced on Americans over the last year and a half. Did they really help “slow the spread” of this disease? And how did states with fewer restrictions fair? Well, a new study has come out that Democrats won’t like one bit.
The study… compared four states: Tennessee and Georgia, which had more relaxed leadership during the height of the pandemic, and Michigan and Kentucky, which were marked by heavy-handed, and sometimes unconstitutional safety orders. The study observed the economic and health impacts of the states’ responses to the pandemic…
Tennessee’s and Georgia’s economies were less impacted and lost fewer jobs during the pandemic than Kentucky and Michigan, which implemented more economic restrictions.
The biggest difference was in Labor Force Participation Rates, with Kentucky and Michigan experiencing a drop in labor force participation roughly four times greater than Tennessee and Georgia.
Tennessee and Georgia did not experience a significant change in new COVID-19 cases after reopening their economies. [Source: Breitbart]
This kind of data Democrats are fighting very hard to hide. But it’s not even the first study to look at this.
States that pushed harsher lockdowns, banning churches, schools, and businesses—obviously suffered much worse economic hardships. Kentucky and Michigan experienced a drop in labor four times worse than Tennessee and Georgia.
What’s even more eye-opening, and perhaps more important than anything else, is that when TN and GA reopened, there was no a “significant change” in new COVID-19 positives.
That suggests that lockdown measures and other government mandates did nothing to control the infection rate.
We’ve seen that repeated in nearly every state that has been closely watched. Factors that influenced the spread of COVID were unrelated to lockdown rules or other restrictions. In fact, it seemed the more a governor pushed lockdowns, the faster the virus spread. Proving the lockdowns were not helping.
What does this mean for the future? Well, we can’t expect Democrats to look at this data and actually do anything about it. But conservative lawmakers and state leaders can push back against demands they return to the medieval-style practices of forced lockdowns and mask mandates.
The only things that seemed to impact the spread of COVID have been vaccinations and plain old herd immunity. Anyone that suggests otherwise could be pushing a political agenda.
Author: Peter Graham