but we also can't assume everything they say is wrong either. It might even be the case that 99.99% stated is correct.
No doubt, although I wouldn't go as far as saying 99.9% ;). The problem is people are believing them simply based on the fact that they are experts. Well, there are other experts who disagree. So who is right? I would say the one with facts backing up their assertions compared to the ones who are proven liars. The gov and CDC have flip-flopped more than a cook at the pancake house. It's hard to believe that they have our best interest at heart.
The genetic fallacy in this case rings true, however, governments track record is about as bad as it gets. Not everything government says is a lie, but in this case, they clearly have not been 100% truthful, and more than likely, have been deceitful. That's not because I hate government, it's just facts.
I also have to trust my account to a degree, or my plumber because they have education and experience in areas I just don't.
These are people you hire, at your choice, who are incentivized by your dollars to do right by you. If they give you the wrong advice or do a bad job, they'll be out of work.
Government is not beholden to the same incentives. In fact, they are beholden to the lobbyists who line their pockets, most often at the expense of their constituents. The main difference is accountability. Private people demand it, government excuses it.
Hahaha, fair... although how far would you go? Would you assume that the CDC advice on Tetanus, Malaria, Yellow Fever, etc is wrong? I honestly have no idea... I'd likely rely on the advice from a local doctor, but even then I don't really trust the medical field. The comparison between the medical industry in the US and Australia is so wild, I feel like whoever I see in the US is trying to upsell me on something.
I guess that's why people are constantly asking their friends and family which experts they trust.
Totally agree with your points on government, particularly the US government. Taking the money out of government (ie, donations) would be such an incredible level up. I really truly hope that we can transition to blockchain governance models instead of governments. Lots of work and lots of resistance of course... but voting between 1 of 2 parties for 4 years just seems insane to me at this point.
I take whatever government tells me with a grain of salt. I try and understand what their end goal is, which if history is any indication, it tends to be more power and more money, not my safety and well being.
I then do my own research via multiple sources, and try and come to my own conclusions.
Things I need to come to said conclusion are facts. Otherwise it's simply conjecture, theories, hypothesis’s, or opinion.
Voting at all is insane to me at this point, lol. I don't need a ruler, and neither do you :)
Hahaha, I think so too.
In your mind though, how would we decide who is going to create or maintain a shared resource without voting for it? Obviously we can't expect each person to be able to maintain the road outside their house... I've honestly never considered removing voting altogether, this is blowing my mind.
I'm also curious on how you decide what you're going to research and what you would trust to experts? After all, corporations are definitely not to be trusted either, they'll lie to everyone to turn a profit.
Sorry, I realise those questions might be way too much for just a comment. If you'd ever be willing to do a post about them I'd be thrilled to read it.
There are journalists out there who share public info that the MSM won't share for obvious reasons. I gather all of it, and try and get an understanding of the truth.
The rest of your questions are good, and I appreciate you taking the time and thoughtfulness to ask them, most people don't get that far. I remember asking myself those very same questions.
I'll get a post written up for ya as soon as I can :)