3 ms·

I have a feeling that many of the working poor with mild symptoms would resist getting tested even if the test is free, due to the economic costs of quarantine

by nokcha 7y ago

I have a feeling that many of the working poor with mild symptoms would resist getting tested even if the test is free, due to the economic costs of quarantine if they test positive. Strengthening the public social safety net (and using govt funds to pay for sick leave of those who test positive) seems like a prudent public-health measure, to help ensure that people are more willing to get tested and to self-quarantine if they are infected.

gopalv 7y ago
> even if the test is free, due to the economic costs of quarantine if they test positive. Worse than that, they could even face a Tom Hanks Philadelphia like situation, after they test positive.
- wyldfire 7y ago
  That's unlikely, covid19 is not infectious for very long after symptoms disappear [relative to HIV's infectiousness].
magduf 7y ago
Yep, and for good reason: they absolutely should keep working (and spreading the disease around) if they have it, because they cannot afford not to. This is the consequence of having a society where there's no real social safety net to handle crises like this. Personally, I'm a well-paid tech worker, but even for me, if I'm quarantined, my company policy is that I cannot come to work (nor can I work from home), and I must take either PTO or (if that's exhausted) medical leave of absence (without pay). Luckily, I'm single and frugal, live well below my means, and have lots of savings because I'm somewhat paranoid, so I can easily live for a few months without pay, but this just isn't true for most people, especially people without families who aren't overpaid tech workers like me. So I certainly cannot criticize people at the low end of the scale who avoid getting quarantined: they have to do this to survive. If we don't like this, then maybe we should have done a better job voting for leaders who would handle health crises better and set up social safety nets for things like this.
- braneloop 7y ago
  Is there any particular reason for why you can't work from home?
  - magduf 7y ago
    Yes.

by nokcha 7y ago

gopalv 7y ago

> even if the test is free, due to the economic costs of quarantine if they test positive. Worse than that, they could even face a Tom Hanks Philadelphia like situation, after they test positive.

wyldfire 7y ago
That's unlikely, covid19 is not infectious for very long after symptoms disappear [relative to HIV's infectiousness].

magduf 7y ago

Yep, and for good reason: they absolutely should keep working (and spreading the disease around) if they have it, because they cannot afford not to. This is the consequence of having a society where there's no real social safety net to handle crises like this. Personally, I'm a well-paid tech worker, but even for me, if I'm quarantined, my company policy is that I cannot come to work (nor can I work from home), and I must take either PTO or (if that's exhausted) medical leave of absence (without pay). Luckily, I'm single and frugal, live well below my means, and have lots of savings because I'm somewhat paranoid, so I can easily live for a few months without pay, but this just isn't true for most people, especially people without families who aren't overpaid tech workers like me. So I certainly cannot criticize people at the low end of the scale who avoid getting quarantined: they have to do this to survive. If we don't like this, then maybe we should have done a better job voting for leaders who would handle health crises better and set up social safety nets for things like this.

braneloop 7y ago
Is there any particular reason for why you can't work from home?
- magduf 7y ago
  Yes.