4 ms·

I’ve seen this attitude quite a lot among younger people lately, it’s just super irresponsible and arrogant. In a situation like this, the responsibility must b

I’ve seen this attitude quite a lot among younger people lately, it’s just super irresponsible and arrogant. In a situation like this, the responsibility must be shared, no one should consider themselves free from the responsibilities of stopping the spread this virus.

tomp 7y ago
> In a situation like this, the responsibility must be shared Why not in other situations though? The elites avoid taxes, Boomers have houses, banks are pumping up the asset bubble, while young people have student debt, can't buy a place to live (or even a car), have no assets and, if they're lucky and productive and high-earners, they "enjoy" 20% higher tax rate than owners of capital... Why exactly should anyone now act in a way that is detrimental to themselves, to save some other predators?
- elliekelly 7y ago
  You might find T.M. Scanlon's What We Owe to Each Other interesting.[1] [1] https://www.scribd.com/document/127602229/Scanlon-1998-What-We-Owe-to-Each-Other https://www.scribd.com/document/127602229/Scanlon-1998-What-...
- freepor 7y ago
  I hate the fact that I kinda see your point.
arcticbull 7y ago
Again, if you don't come into contact with the vulnerable (or anyone else who does) then you aren't putting anyone at risk and you are developing herd immunity which will in time likely end the virus.
- btilly 7y ago
  The problem is that while you may not deal with old people, the same is not true of all of the people that you deal with. Remember that it takes an average of no more than 6 steps in your social network to get from any person in the USA to any other person in the USA.
  - netsharc 7y ago
    Mr. arcticbull has replied elsewhere that then it's the responsibility of that person (whom he might deal with, and would deal with the vulnerable as well) to quarantine themselves. To extrapolate, presumably he wouldn't feel any guilt if that vulnerable person died and he was a vector that got the virus to said person. I wonder what a valid response to this logic is. Maybe: "not all people will be responsible, so it's your duty to be responsible". I guess he'd respond with, "But why should those people be free to enjoy themselves while I'm stuck at home?". In any case, it's interesting how the sense of community has died.
    - arcticbull 7y ago
      I'm genuinely not sure where the balance here should be drawn. The UK is making the case that it's the best thing for the community for all the young folks to get the disease to protect the vulnerable so clearly it's not black and white.
- hellofunk 7y ago
  While you probably don’t realize it, you have just underscored my point.

tomp 7y ago

> In a situation like this, the responsibility must be shared Why not in other situations though? The elites avoid taxes, Boomers have houses, banks are pumping up the asset bubble, while young people have student debt, can't buy a place to live (or even a car), have no assets and, if they're lucky and productive and high-earners, they "enjoy" 20% higher tax rate than owners of capital... Why exactly should anyone now act in a way that is detrimental to themselves, to save some other predators?

elliekelly 7y ago
You might find T.M. Scanlon's What We Owe to Each Other interesting.[1] [1] https://www.scribd.com/document/127602229/Scanlon-1998-What-We-Owe-to-Each-Other https://www.scribd.com/document/127602229/Scanlon-1998-What-...
freepor 7y ago
I hate the fact that I kinda see your point.

arcticbull 7y ago

Again, if you don't come into contact with the vulnerable (or anyone else who does) then you aren't putting anyone at risk and you are developing herd immunity which will in time likely end the virus.

btilly 7y ago
The problem is that while you may not deal with old people, the same is not true of all of the people that you deal with. Remember that it takes an average of no more than 6 steps in your social network to get from any person in the USA to any other person in the USA.
- netsharc 7y ago
  Mr. arcticbull has replied elsewhere that then it's the responsibility of that person (whom he might deal with, and would deal with the vulnerable as well) to quarantine themselves. To extrapolate, presumably he wouldn't feel any guilt if that vulnerable person died and he was a vector that got the virus to said person. I wonder what a valid response to this logic is. Maybe: "not all people will be responsible, so it's your duty to be responsible". I guess he'd respond with, "But why should those people be free to enjoy themselves while I'm stuck at home?". In any case, it's interesting how the sense of community has died.
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    I'm genuinely not sure where the balance here should be drawn. The UK is making the case that it's the best thing for the community for all the young folks to get the disease to protect the vulnerable so clearly it's not black and white.
hellofunk 7y ago
While you probably don’t realize it, you have just underscored my point.