About rules, statistics, … ()

… gold and Gazprom

Useful vs. useless rules

Rules are there to be followed. This is particularly well known to stockbrokers who, in the heat of the moment, do not pay attention to a previously set stop loss, or who have placed far too large a share of their portfolio on a supposedly “safe thing”. Once the damage has occurred, the misery is great and one firmly resolves that such a mistake should not be made again. So much for sensible rules. But of course there are others as well, as has been shown, for example, by the policy of combating corona and shows again and again. In Bavaria, for example, there was the now famous rule that in the early days you were not even allowed to sit alone on a bench outdoors – a rule that has now become notorious for the absurdity of some measures. But even if you take the train from Munich to Vienna or even to Budapest today, you are subject to different rules on the same train with the same passengers. No sooner have you crossed the border to Germany again on the way back than passengers are barked at with the command “Mask open!”, which is somehow reminiscent of the “trunk open!” at the former inner-German border. The waiter could have done without the postscript “We are here in Germany!”, well, yes, because the location could be deduced from the tone of voice.

Wrong-way driver with winter tires

Meaningless rules can, indeed must, be questioned. In principle, this even applies to every rule, because it is not always possible to know a priori which category a rule ultimately falls into. In this respect, the dictum of RKI boss Lothar Wieler “These rules must never be questioned” at the start of the measures was one thing above all – a public declaration of bankruptcy. At that time, however, Wieler was still working under Health Minister Jens Spahn (CDU), who has since mutated into an energy expert. Under his successor Karl Lauterbach (SPD) – in cooperation with Minister of Justice Marco Buschmann (FDP) – the draft of a new infection protection law has now been made public, which has it all. Through the back door, everyone who is not “freshly” vaccinated/recovered (max. 3 months ago)” would be subject to a mask requirement in certain situations in the period from October to Easter. Incidentally, the period is not derived from evidence or the evaluation report that quickly disappeared into the drawers, but from a clumsy analogy to the calendar winter tire obligation, which does not exist at all. Under Lauterbach it seems that catchy wording beats fundamental rights. The three-month period is also a rough estimate, as are the individual measures. As a result, this means that anyone who wants to be consistently “freshly vaccinated” between October and Easter would have to undergo three more injections – in early October, early January and early April. April 1st in particular could become a popular “vaccination date”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.