A couple of interesting things to note about the notion of travel bans to stop Ebola: *Already* there are no direct flights between the USA and Liberia, Sierra Leone, or Guinea — the three countries where the outbreak is at it’s worst. So - direct travel to those places is ALREADY nonexistent. Notice how IT DIDN’T HELP. Now, we DO have flights between the US and Nigeria - which has now had 20 cases. We could ban those flights I suppose - but remember you’re talking about a continent (Africa) without many well-guarded international borders. If people want to fly to the US, nothings keeping them from traveling into another country to get a flight. So - should we ban all flights to and from the entire continent of Africa? For how long? In this country just putting a slight tax on carbon emissions is seen by many as far too great an economic disruption - so can we really contemplate shutting down commerce to a whole continent? Also: Let’s suppose we did enact a strict ban on people who have been into an infected area entering the USA. How do we determine peoples’ travel histories? Right now, we ask them and they tell us. Put a strict ban in place, and I have a funny feeling travelers candor would diminish. There’s no conceivable method of verifying whether someone did or did not go into the infected areas if they wont tell us. Its not like everyone has a tracking chip. Travel bans sound good but I can’t see how they could possibly be executed in any useful way.
Posted on: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 05:25:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015