Originally Posted by
AntiPeter
Silver is great, I agree. I won't argue that lockdowns aren't effective, my argument is the cost associated with them outweigh
the benefits.
This is not a pleasant or politically correct conversation to have, I think it becomes one of ethics and morality. In the end I think most people are in charge of their own health -- the decision whether to lockdown or quarantine is personal and should not be mandated by the government. This disease effects people so differently (from asymptomatic to death) treating everyone with blanket restrictions seems really overbearing and causes a lot of problems that haven't been discussed much yet.
It’s also one of
humanity, faith, and belief that our system is truly dedicated to “Insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, and promote the general welfare”.
To base decisions on that “difficult discussion” you mention - at this time- you have to be willing to walk into an overcrowded and desperate hospital, look everyone there in the eye and tell them, “you’re just not worth it”, before you turn out the lights.
And that’s just a loose analogy to the impact on thousands that will be affected directly and indirectly by this illness and death. I, for one, am extremely impressed and thankful our leaders have chosen to sacrifice economic value for human value in the face of this dynamic and uncertain threat to life. That simple virtue underpins the entire reason there is any value to an economy at all.
In time, once we have done all we can to confront this virus, we will come to terms with the unavoidable life and death implications of living with it as a fact of nature. But until then, in my opinion, the efforts and sacrifices we have made and continue to make are unquestionably heroic, and absolutely the right thing to do.