Sheesh, it seems like you would be against everything just because the information can be used for bad things... To use your logic (at least how I'm interpreting it), we should also abolish driver licenses as well, because look, there's a database of people! With addresses, etc!
And that would be a bad idea because untrained drivers may cause injury to others. The same logic applies to disease tracking, we have to know because someone might harm someone else. It's being measured so we know if prevention methods like lockdowns and masks are working. And just like a driver's license is not something you can volunteer to have (or not), neither should the knowledge of your virus status be optional.
Imagine running a country and being asked "So, how is your country coping with the virus?", and answering "I don't know, we don't have the numbers."...
> that would be a bad idea because untrained drivers may cause injury to others
One can always justify more government power and more government micromanagement of people's lives by claiming it will prevent some hypothetical harm. Here in the United States we're not supposed to accept that.
> Imagine running a country
Imagine having a country where no one person or small group of people gets to "run" things--where, instead, every adult citizen is assumed to be responsible for their own life and their own actions, and to suffer appropriate consequences if they cause harm to someone else. Where nobody is allowed to just declare by fiat what everyone else has to do or can't do. Where collective action is done by reasonable people persuading other reasonable people that a particular course of action is best for all, not by some people just dictating to everyone else what the "right" thing to do is.
The United States of America is supposed to be that kind of country.
Geez, you can fantasize all you want but that's not what we currently have. As Donald Rumsfeld said (I think he's a war criminal but at least what he said here makes sense): "You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time."
And governing by ignoring reality is not effective governing, sure you can say "Everyone has to be emancipated and be masters of their own fate!", but again that's not what we have right now, people are dying now. You can't just say "well, in the ideal USA, we just need to inform them how to protect themselves and they'll follow those 'suggestions', so that's what we'll do." because this is not the ideal world and people are too uninformed or have too many self-interests to listen.
> A lot of people will call me a Libertarian [a]sshole [...]
If you want to to force unusable fantasy world rules in this current world, well...
> If you're saying otherwise, you're insanely delusional, but well, that's probably how you see me.
My question to you is simple: do you see yourself as capable of managing your own life and being responsible for your own actions? I certainly see myself that way. My belief is that most Americans do too, so I assume you do as well. And if you do, then you are insanely delusional to be talking as though people need someone else, whether it's the government or "experts" or whatever, to tell them how to manage their lives.
Perhaps I'm wrong in my belief. Perhaps you honestly think that you yourself are not capable of managing your own life and being responsible for your own actions. Perhaps most Americans are like you and not me.
If you in fact don't think you're capable of managing your own life and being responsible for your own actions, then I have another simple question for you: who else do you expect to do it? If you expect our politicians and other so-called "elites" to do it, then once again, you're the one who's insanely delusional, not me. If you honestly don't think you're capable of managing your own life and being responsible for your own actions, my strong advice to you is to learn how, quickly, because otherwise you are putting your life in the hands of people who cannot be trusted with it.
I suppose there is one other possibility: that you think you, yourself, are capable of managing your own life and being responsible for your own actions, but you don't think most other Americans are (presumably including me). If so, once more, you're insanely delusional, unless you have very, very strong evidence that you are that much more capable of managing your own life and taking responsibility for your own actions than most other Americans.
Ever heard of Dunning-Kruger? Geez. Subjective opinion of one's self can be vastly different to the objective truth.
I wonder what drunk driving stats currently look like, despite harsh laws against them. These are people who believe "I'm fine to drive" and disregard the health of others when they get on the road. Imagine if in your magical world there are no drunk driving laws, because hey, let's trust everyone to be capable blah blah blah. On that topic, substance abuse.. but hey "my body, my problem?" right? Except substance abusers become a problem when they commit crimes against other people so they can get their fix, and when they fall over in public and start foaming in the mouth needing the ambulance. (Not familiar with the libertarian cult ideology, does one need a fat credit card before the ambulance start treating one's self?).
Whatever magical believe you have about those capabilities, yeah, most people in the world don't have them to the degree of perfection you think you have. Should I study more to advance my career? Yes. Should I have a better work-life balance? Yes. Am I doing those things? No, instead I'm spending time responding to crackpots on the Internet.
So yeah, trying to govern a society with your (IMO idiotic) assumptions is a stupid idea, because it's a society we don't have. Should we just cancel all drink driivng laws because we should assume right now that everyone will be responsible and not drink drive? To expand that, should we cancel all police because we can assume everyone will be responsible citizens and not commit crimes against others? What a genius idea. /s
If people just don't test because they don't want to give info to the government, that's not an information gain for the government, it's just a loss for everybody else.
This is why we here in the US call it a free country. It is very different from the democratic freedoms of other countries. We founded this nation because of misuse of government power. You should always be skeptical of government oversight. Our constitution was written by very bright people who understood that mob rule and government overreach are very easy to fall into. Think of how phishing attempts sometimes use your emotions/anxieties against you, “Urgent, this is your boss, I need your email and PW to log in.”
The same fear mongering has been used to shut down schools across the US when there is little statistical evidence showing spread occurs in schools. Many other nations know this and kids are still going to school. This is a prime example of when government overreach is entirely misguided and political.
Edit: Thank goodness we still have free speech here. I fear many of our freedoms can easily be eradicated by the, “saving just one life,” argument.
Edit edit: Also not trying to be too inflammatory but China has all the data in the world and they fudged the numbers they sent out. We already have entirely data driven societies and you can ask Hong Kong how much they wanted it.
And that would be a bad idea because untrained drivers may cause injury to others. The same logic applies to disease tracking, we have to know because someone might harm someone else. It's being measured so we know if prevention methods like lockdowns and masks are working. And just like a driver's license is not something you can volunteer to have (or not), neither should the knowledge of your virus status be optional.
Imagine running a country and being asked "So, how is your country coping with the virus?", and answering "I don't know, we don't have the numbers."...