Coronavirus

I hope you are all doing well, I see that some are finding the situation advantageous as far as SA is concerned.
The situation in France is an ongoing mess — first, a decree restricting people's movement to important matters only, now it's evolving to parks and forests' access being restricted (in my region) because of people's complete disregard for health guidelines. Even night-curfew in certain municipalities are being set up
 

worrywort

Well-known member
At first I thought everyone was overreacting, then I began to think people weren't taking it serious enough, and now I've swung back to feeling like people are going too far again.

I think what Trump said about the cure shouldn't be worse than the disease is something I've been thinking about a lot too. It's hard to know how to respond appropriately; how to get the balance right. The question of the value of life is a hard one to answer. If the virus was only affecting my community how much would I be willing to sacrifice to save them? Washing my hands, social distancing, buying their shopping, no problem. A few weeks off work, taking a small economic hit, dipping into my savings, sure, I can do that. But destroying my life's business, going bankrupt, not being able to feed my own children? That's tougher.

I think it's the use of force by the government that troubles me the most. If it was left as a voluntary decision that each individual can make as to how much they're willing to sacrifice for the sake of the vulnerable, then that would've sat with me better. Though perhaps that's naive? Or maybe heartless, I don't know.

But I've always had a problem with forced altruism. It's like, imagine if there was a big hurricane that ravaged a chunk of your country. Then imagine if the government forced all the people in the areas that weren't hit to hand over all their savings to help the ravaged town. It wouldn't seem right. If people want to voluntarily donate money then that's fine, but it shouldn't be forced.

Well, how is this virus any different? For most people this virus won't affect them much at all, and yet we're all being forced to make huge sacrifices for the sake of those that are hit. Now, again, for the most part, many of the sacrifices I was happy to make voluntarily anyway. But when I hear of people's life business's going under and I hear talk of a depression worse than the 30's, I wonder if we're going too far.

And I know a lot of people are gonna die from this thing, but millions of people die in all kinds of horrific ways every year globally, but nobody ever gave a shit about any of those deaths before. I've struggled with this for years; that I can't save everybody. All I can control is how much of myself I'm willing and able to give to others, and anything I choose to give should be considered a gift, not something others are innately entitled to.

I just feel like we've gone about this all wrong. When a hurricane is heading to a certain town we don't tell the whole country to evacuate, just those in the danger zone. Similarly, I think we should've told the most vulnerable to self isolate, while the rest of us do our best to protect them and limit the spread as best we can to the measure that we're each willing and able to sacrifice.

But I don't know, maybe this situation is a little different. Maybe we are the hurricane. I'm not sure. Anyway, rant over.
 
At first I thought everyone was overreacting, then I began to think people weren't taking it serious enough, and now I've swung back to feeling like people are going too far again.

I think what Trump said about the cure shouldn't be worse than the disease is something I've been thinking about a lot too. It's hard to know how to respond appropriately; how to get the balance right. The question of the value of life is a hard one to answer. If the virus was only affecting my community how much would I be willing to sacrifice to save them? Washing my hands, social distancing, buying their shopping, no problem. A few weeks off work, taking a small economic hit, dipping into my savings, sure, I can do that. But destroying my life's business, going bankrupt, not being able to feed my own children? That's tougher.

I think it's the use of force by the government that troubles me the most. If it was left as a voluntary decision that each individual can make as to how much they're willing to sacrifice for the sake of the vulnerable, then that would've sat with me better. Though perhaps that's naive? Or maybe heartless, I don't know.

But I've always had a problem with forced altruism. It's like, imagine if there was a big hurricane that ravaged a chunk of your country. Then imagine if the government forced all the people in the areas that weren't hit to hand over all their savings to help the ravaged town. It wouldn't seem right. If people want to voluntarily donate money then that's fine, but it shouldn't be forced.

Well, how is this virus any different? For most people this virus won't affect them much at all, and yet we're all being forced to make huge sacrifices for the sake of those that are hit. Now, again, for the most part, many of the sacrifices I was happy to make voluntarily anyway. But when I hear of people's life business's going under and I hear talk of a depression worse than the 30's, I wonder if we're going too far.

And I know a lot of people are gonna die from this thing, but millions of people die in all kinds of horrific ways every year globally, but nobody ever gave a shit about any of those deaths before. I've struggled with this for years; that I can't save everybody. All I can control is how much of myself I'm willing and able to give to others, and anything I choose to give should be considered a gift, not something others are innately entitled to.

I just feel like we've gone about this all wrong. When a hurricane is heading to a certain town we don't tell the whole country to evacuate, just those in the danger zone. Similarly, I think we should've told the most vulnerable to self isolate, while the rest of us do our best to protect them and limit the spread as best we can to the measure that we're each willing and able to sacrifice.

But I don't know, maybe this situation is a little different. Maybe we are the hurricane. I'm not sure. Anyway, rant over.
I think the government is in a bit of a "Damned if we do, damned if we don't" situation. On the one hand, if they do nothing and then millions upon millions of people die while countries that took action have much smaller death totals, torches and pitchforks will come out for everyone who lost a family member, friend, neighbor or coworker to the virus. On the other hand, if they take action that results in pain and suffering to citizens - either through economic strain, business losses, or general quality of life issues, again all the torches and pitchforks come out towards the government.

I think personally that regardless of whether or not action is taken a lot of this stuff would happen anyway. If half a town is in the hospital, no one is going to the local restaurant or bowling alley even if there is no restriction on doing so. It's going to suck economically no matter what.

A lot of pundits have been calling this a false choice as well, which is perhaps another way to look at it. It's not either we kill the economy or we kill all the people, maybe there exists a situation where we can salvage as much of both as possible? There's all these different ideas about how to support people financially at this time, whether it's sending people checks or reducing tax or removing penalties for late bill payments or a hundred different things, and if just the right combination is selected maybe less people die, and most business stay afloat, most mortgages don't go under, most people don't go hungry, and after 3 or 4 months the world is mostly the same.

That of course may all be a pipe dream, and there really is no solution that satisfies both needs, I'm not sure, but food for thought.
 

Aru_Sarutobi

Active member
lol, I haven't been here for an entire decade...it seems the coronavirus shows just how fragile the world really is when we have incompetence.
 

Aru_Sarutobi

Active member
Times have changed, people are dying, things are getting worse. We need to take the powa from big pharma and put it into the hands of government we need to act like FDR is alive again, but nooooo, Americans just want to stay entertained.
 
China finally ended some of their lockdowns after the new case number hit 0. Unfortunately they've noticed a 2nd phase of new infections which are apparently because of travelers and so at least 1 county has had to go back on lockdown. The new infections aren't remotely limited to that county, either. The numbers of this do not bode well.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ack-under-lockdown-after-infection-re-emerges

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsa...xt-phase-of-its-covid-19-outbreak-suppression
 
China finally ended some of their lockdowns after the new case number hit 0. Unfortunately they've noticed a 2nd phase of new infections which are apparently because of travelers and so at least 1 county has had to go back on lockdown. The new infections aren't remotely limited to that county, either. The numbers of this do not bode well.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ack-under-lockdown-after-infection-re-emerges

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsa...xt-phase-of-its-covid-19-outbreak-suppression
This is alarming for the rest of the world, those asymptomatic ones are the stealthiest!
At least they've started banning the consumption of cats and dogs as well as the trade of wild animals.
 
Yes, did you read about the asympomatic doctors infecting patients? Blergh.
No, I didn't. It really takes the cake and makes you doubt the effectiveness of sanitary environments where strict measures are supposed to be taken.
As a general rule, I'm assuming that I already have contracted the virus so I'm being cautious to not transmit it to the others.
 
Top