t effective. But then you would also have to factor in what happens to the school they left behind. Did it get worse? What happened to the average? So I don't think things like this can be studied actually. So I wouldn't totally trust this number. But it does, but at the very least it can help you size things. So I think this at least is evidence that charter schools are not worse. But I don't think you could say that numbers such as this, I wouldn't ever trust them to be accurate per se. But if there were some big problem where they spent more money and got less results you'd probably see it. They'd probably be good enough to see.

All right. Digital Doug on Twitter was questioning the fact that the coronavirus numbers in the United States are over half a million deaths whereas regular seasonal flu would be maybe 10 percent of that typically. And Digital Doug says if you pay hospitals five figures for treating the flu, meaning the regular seasonal flu, and five figures more for putting patients on respirators, let's see what the regular flu numbers look like then.

So Digital Doug believes that if hospitals were incentivized to record the regular seasonal flu that there would be 10 times as much death attributed to the regular flu. Does that make sense to you?

Now let me tell you how to think of this argument. If the argument is that financial incentives cause people to code more things as coronavirus, that's a good argument. Would you say? Does anybody disagree with that? That if you, and I say this a million times, if you put friction on something you'll get less of it almost always. Doesn't even matter what you're talking about. You add friction and you get a little less of it. If you add incentives, again for almost anything, you're going to get more of it.

So the argument is that incentives have been added somewhat accidentally because people had good intentions. But there's an incentive to say that something is a COVID infection or a COVID death when maybe