But I think that you are right; I think that this has been contained. It is too bad that the people of the world can't always work together as well as they did this time.It will take time, but I think that this was one of those events that, in retrospect will actually show up as one of the more important events of the decade. I think that, for example, the China that comes out of this will be a somewhat different country. And I think that there are a lot of countries what were involved only peripherally in SARS and in controlling it that will as a result participate more in international health organizations and programs.Certainly the next new disease to come along will find an international air travel system much better prepared to cope. (That is if any of the airlines can survive the hit they took.)Another example is that the campaign against AIDS in Africa that President Bush asked for in his State of the Union Address probably will get funded. Not much to begin with, but throwing too much money in to begin with would be a mistake.It is one of those painful realities. A working, effective campaign to wipe out AIDS is going to have to start slowly. Other efforts to treat AIDS, or to make drugs wore widely available can occur in parallel. But the nature of bureaucracy is such that an effective international effort has got to work with other agencies and organizations. A new program that starts with too much money will form an organization devoted to spending that money. (Hopefully in an effective manner, but it may not.) Once you have a bureaucracy that is organized to spend its own money the inherent conservatism of such organizations means that it will never put working with other organizations ahead of its 'own' programs.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. M