Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What gets me very upset is the unnecessary nature of this shutdown. From the theater of lining up to enter stores that were never particularly crowded to begin with to the outdoor wearing of masks (indoors I understand) to the unneeded losses of jobs and permanent shuttering of businesses, no one thought through the costs. There was no risk assessment or consideration. Just panic. I will do just fine, in all likelihood. Contrary to your imagination, I am very concerned for a lot of other people.
Tell that to the parents of a five or six year old that will lose a few years, if not more, of education. Tell that to families paying $60,000 a year to provide their offspring with access to a website labeled with the name of a university. Tell that to people who have paid to live in a major city, say Toronto or New York for the access to culture or night life. They've been rooked. This is not a pity party.
There are times when that is necessary. I say this is more like the beginning of WW I, where people were told their sons would be home by Christmas. Instead a world order was shaken up, and orderly societies replaced, after an interval, with Nazism and Stalinism. I think the world would have done better with a few more years of Hapsburghs and Kaisers than with the carnage that followed. People should think hard before ending a functioning system.
In a different context, your country-person, Joni Mitchell sang "don't it always seem to go, that you don't know what you got till it's gone." In that case the issue was the destruction of nature. In this case, it's the destruction of worthwhile man-made civilization.
In this case, I will grant that when the disease hits someone just right they may die. But that is ever the case with standard influenza, cancer, etc. You don't shut down society and cause incalculable suffering. It may be that very few will be saved, given co-morbidity.
I honestly don't think this "self discipline and patience" will result in much if any benefit. Sorry. If I did I might feel differently.
I just wonder if you would say that if you or someone close to you was very ill with Covid 19.
I just wonder if you would say that if you or someone close to you was very ill with Covid 19.
On a scale of 1-10 someone at about a "6" died of it, as did a client for whom I succeeded beyond my wildest dreams and whom I liked. So that one is about a "7". Truth is he didn't take care of himself.
I try to post my sincere and not hypocritical views.
On a scale of 1-10 someone at about a "6" died of it, as did a client for whom I succeeded beyond my wildest dreams and whom I liked. So that one is about a "7". Truth is he didn't take care of himself.
I try to post my sincere and not hypocritical views.
I believe you, that you share your sincere views. Nothing wrong with that.I just don't think you've thought this through. Even though New York was hit hard, at some point efforts were made to minimize the spread of covid. The trouble with things when they work well, is that people decide it wasn't so bad after all, especially when they and their loved ones escape the brunt of what's happening. And that's my worry. Young people also have compromised immune systems and they also die. There are reports of children being affected. We don't know enough about this virus to just let it go.
Even if your client had underlying health issues that contributed to his death, and even if one were to mentally shrug one's shoulders and say, that's life, your client still had the potential to infect other people who are "innocent," so to speak.
This virus may not give people lifetime immunity. Everyone ages. Everyone gets health problems. There may never be a vaccine. This virus is not the inheritance I want to leave the next generation.
This virus may not give people lifetime immunity. Everyone ages. Everyone gets health problems. There may never be a vaccine. This virus is not the inheritance I want to leave the next generation.
The question is whether sheltering in place and shutting down just feels virtuous or whether it accomplishes anything.
The question is whether sheltering in place and shutting down just feels virtuous or whether it accomplishes anything.
Just do the math. One infected person can infect hundreds who in turn can each infect hundreds who in turn could infect hundreds more. The infected can very easily spread the virus before they even have any symptoms. So they may innocently spread it in the workplace, in stores and in social gatherings.
How would workplaces be able to stay open with so many more people off sick or dying?
I read the article and thanks for posting. The problem is the boy who cried "wolf"; there were similar alarms for SARS, MERS and H1N1. If we had shut down the economy each time we'd be a lot poorer. The merger of the Covid-19 "shelter-in-place" advocacy with other ideologies that are skeptical of or hostile to growth and affluence gives people pause.
Many, including quite honestly myself have my doubts that the agenda is purely public health.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnirene
Just do the math. One infected person can infect hundreds who in turn can each infect hundreds who in turn could infect hundreds more. The infected can very easily spread the virus before they even have any symptoms. So they may innocently spread it in the workplace, in stores and in social gatherings.
The reasoning sounds appealing. Its flaw is that exposure≠infection≠serious illness or death. By the time you finish the algorithm you are down to very small numbers.
I read the article and thanks for posting. The problem is the boy who cried "wolf"; there were similar alarms for SARS, MERS and H1N1. If we had shut down the economy each time we'd be a lot poorer. The merger of the Covid-19 "shelter-in-place" advocacy with other ideologies that are skeptical of or hostile to growth and affluence gives people pause.
Many, including quite honestly myself have my doubts that the agenda is purely public health.The reasoning sounds appealing. Its flaw is that exposure≠infection≠serious illness or death. By the time you finish the algorithm you are down to very small numbers.
That's the object of the whole exercise; to keep the final numbers as low as possible - providing of course you put a higher priority on human lives.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
