5 ms·

i don't mean to be pessimistic, but my worry is that after this is "over", everyone will go on and on about how it's the best of humanity that got us through th

i don't mean to be pessimistic, but my worry is that after this is "over", everyone will go on and on about how it's the best of humanity that got us through this. but in reality, it's the worst of humanity that caused this and our under-preparedness. we should really look inward and say "we can do and could have done better" and not pat ourselves on the back too much. our over-population and further encroachment on wildlife will further increase chances of zoonotic disease spread, on top of all the other problems of climate change, socioeconomic inequality, repercussions of sudden disasters both human and natural, etc. we have got to start taking our place on this planet seriously and not as a privilege and also not over-congratulating ourselves when we scrape by once again. we cannot continue to ignore people saying, with mountains of evidence, that events will happen. and we cannot sustain growth at all costs economies and policies. but your point is good. we gotta get through this first and maintain a sense of calm and hope. but we really have got to take a step back and re-evaluate when this passes in whatever form it does.

goatherders 7y ago
Settle down. "The worst of humanity caused this?" It's a virus and our medical system has limits. Shit happens. We react and (hopefully) come out well on the other side. You say overpopulation is a problem? Fine. Give me a practical and ethical solution. You say encroachment on wildlife? Ok, fine. Please provide a practical and ethical solution. We, as people, live on this planet. By and large people are doing the best they can. Should we do more for the environment? Of course. But suggesting that disease as a result of overpopulation is our fault without offering a practical solution adds nothing to the dialog.
- nikofeyn 7y ago
  > Settle down. ... It's a virus and our medical system has limits. Shit happens. We react and (hopefully) come out well on the other side. so your response is to just throw our hands up in the air and say "shit happens"? how is that productive in any way? that's exactly how we got here. this article is a good read: http://nautil.us/issue/83/intelligence/the-man-who-saw-the-pandemic-coming http://nautil.us/issue/83/intelligence/the-man-who-saw-the-p... just because there are viruses existing in the world doesn't mean we should be cavalier with them. over-population and our encroachment on wildlife is what's leading to the increasing rate of transfers of zoonotic viruses. > You say overpopulation is a problem? Fine. Give me a practical and ethical solution. > You say encroachment on wildlife? Ok, fine. Please provide a practical and ethical solution. you seem to imply that there is literally no point in talking about these problems? as if we couldn't possibly come up with practical and ethical solutions? it isn't an argument to say "unless you have a detailed solution at this moment then the problem isn't a problem". a problem without a solution is still a problem. your argument is petulant. > But suggesting that disease as a result of overpopulation is our fault without offering a practical solution adds nothing to the dialog. it's not my suggestion. it's experts' conclusions based strongly upon evidence. it does further the dialog. viruses of this nature, and other issues facing humanity, have happened and will continue to happen at increasing rates. there is no need to have such a huge human population other than narcissism and selfishness. there is no need to eat certain animals. there are not a lot of reasons for much of the stuff we do other than we do it because we can. (however, a lot of interactions with animals with increase naturally simply due to our expansion into their habitat.) how in the world does it further the dialog to say shit happens and we live on this planet and do our best?
  - goatherders 7y ago
    I'll say it again: offer a practical solution and I'll listen. I certainly am not burying my head in the sand and I recognize we as a species have expedited these issues. Point granted. But tell me what's next? Dont link to articles from academics and theoretical posits. Tell me what we actually DO without mandated birth control, resource allowance/ration... I get that we are part of the problem. But that's going to happen again. We can be aggravated that the ignorant population wont get in line or we can talk actual practical solutions. I'm game for a dialog. You go first.
    - nikofeyn 7y ago
      so what are your suggestions, exactly? just allow everyone to do what they want because a slight reduction in that might inconvenience them and things are going to happen anyway so why bother? what are you even arguing for?
  - brabel 7y ago
    > a problem without a solution is still a problem. The solutions are well known to a lot of problems we have, we just don't want to talk about them! Why don't we, for example, look at how all these lock downs we are having to do to slow down the virus spread are impacting the environment positively? So, why don't we try some of this on a more permanent basics to slow down climate change?? The effort for me as a person has been incredibly little: just work from home and avoid going to restaurants and public events. That's it! The effect on the economy would certainly be huge, but what is our priority? You know, and I know, the answer.
- jamesrcole 7y ago
  > Settle down. "The worst of humanity caused this?" It's a virus and our medical system has limits. Shit happens. Sorry to say it, but that just demonstrates a major lack of knowledge of this situation and the events that led up to it and the way it was handled. Some of which go back years. The fact that you think this is just a matter of our medical system. The fact that you think (“shit happens”) that there wasn’t really anything that could have been done. I don’t have the time or energy to dig up a list of thing for you to read but if you want you’ll be able to find stuff if you read around and do some googling. Here’s one thing to read https://www.businessinsider.com.au/bill-gates-warns-the-next-pandemic-disease-is-coming-2018-4?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com.au/bill-gates-warns-the-next...
- selestify 7y ago
  The first step to solving a problem is admitting that we have one in the first place. Also, the disease itself may not have been our fault, but the sheer incompetence of many countries in dealing with it most certainly is.
- onion2k 7y ago
  It's a virus and our medical system has limits. Governments shutting down pandemic response units (eg https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/03/14/world/science-health-world/donald-trump-us-disbanded-nsc-pandemic-unit/ https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/03/14/world/science-h...) because there hasn't been a pandemic recently is a self-imposed, short-sighted, and unnecessary limit. It's not fair to say the healthcare system has limits if you're only providing the bare minimum (or less).
  - goatherders 7y ago
    Agreed. And shutting 5hat down is a betrayal of those that dont know by those that we trust DO. There are 330 million people in this country (approx) that trust fewer than a couple thousand to guide us safely from pandemics. Those couple thousand are largely controlled by a few dozen whose motivations are political or economic in nature.
  - paublyrne 7y ago
    > Governments shutting down pandemic response units One government specifically did this. > It's not fair to say the healthcare system has limits if you're only providing the bare minimum Healthcare systems all over the world are struggling are preparing to struggle in the coming weeks, many of which do not provide only the 'bare minimum' but seek to provide good national coverage. While we'd all love to see more joined up thinking between countries in tackling these kinds of crises both during and before, you're being unnecessarily harsh. We are human after all.
    - taborj 7y ago
      >One government specifically did this. Except they didn't, see my reply above.
  - taborj 7y ago
    > Governments shutting down pandemic response units Check your source. This appears to have been disproved. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/16/no-white-house-didnt-dissolve-its-pandemic-response-office/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/16/no-white-...
- rorykoehler 7y ago
  Why do ethics suddenly matter when short term human inconvenience are a consequence.
- hakunin 7y ago
  People ate bats; Chinese government covered up the virus for a while; big US pharma wasn’t incentivized to research a solution; underinsured Americans were afraid to go to doctor; immigrants were afraid to go to doctor; US government just sunk trillions into economy (which vanished in mere hours), but can’t promise free tests and treatment for everyone; US government messed up the cautionary messaging; US has no systems in place to handle anything like this. ^ this is a list of problems I read in the news over the past few days. Pretty sure there are a lot of solutions people have been proposing, most of which are completely feasible.
  - marnett 7y ago
    As a slight nitpick the US government did not sink any money during this ordeal. The Federal Reserve is not the US Government; it is our somewhat government affiliated private central bank. Bailouts, which are likely to come, will be from the US government through the Treasury, however.
    - barry-cotter 7y ago
      The Fed is a government organ. It is not a private entity. Its debts are the US government’s.
  - kd5bjo 7y ago
    There’s nothing that I could have personally done to affect any of the things you’ve listed here. For the vast majority of people, this is just some that’s happened and needs to be dealt with. Occasional devastating diseases have been part of the human condition for millenia, and the global coordination put forth to fight this one is unprecedented which marks real progress. It really wasn’t that long ago that stopping a pandemic at its source became anything more than a fantasy, and it’ll take a few rounds before we get it right.
  - xorcist 7y ago
    > underinsured Americans were afraid to go to doctor [...] > US government just sunk trillions into economy These two sentences are just waiting for a punch line.

goatherders 7y ago

Settle down. "The worst of humanity caused this?" It's a virus and our medical system has limits. Shit happens. We react and (hopefully) come out well on the other side. You say overpopulation is a problem? Fine. Give me a practical and ethical solution. You say encroachment on wildlife? Ok, fine. Please provide a practical and ethical solution. We, as people, live on this planet. By and large people are doing the best they can. Should we do more for the environment? Of course. But suggesting that disease as a result of overpopulation is our fault without offering a practical solution adds nothing to the dialog.

nikofeyn 7y ago
> Settle down. ... It's a virus and our medical system has limits. Shit happens. We react and (hopefully) come out well on the other side. so your response is to just throw our hands up in the air and say "shit happens"? how is that productive in any way? that's exactly how we got here. this article is a good read: http://nautil.us/issue/83/intelligence/the-man-who-saw-the-pandemic-coming http://nautil.us/issue/83/intelligence/the-man-who-saw-the-p... just because there are viruses existing in the world doesn't mean we should be cavalier with them. over-population and our encroachment on wildlife is what's leading to the increasing rate of transfers of zoonotic viruses. > You say overpopulation is a problem? Fine. Give me a practical and ethical solution. > You say encroachment on wildlife? Ok, fine. Please provide a practical and ethical solution. you seem to imply that there is literally no point in talking about these problems? as if we couldn't possibly come up with practical and ethical solutions? it isn't an argument to say "unless you have a detailed solution at this moment then the problem isn't a problem". a problem without a solution is still a problem. your argument is petulant. > But suggesting that disease as a result of overpopulation is our fault without offering a practical solution adds nothing to the dialog. it's not my suggestion. it's experts' conclusions based strongly upon evidence. it does further the dialog. viruses of this nature, and other issues facing humanity, have happened and will continue to happen at increasing rates. there is no need to have such a huge human population other than narcissism and selfishness. there is no need to eat certain animals. there are not a lot of reasons for much of the stuff we do other than we do it because we can. (however, a lot of interactions with animals with increase naturally simply due to our expansion into their habitat.) how in the world does it further the dialog to say shit happens and we live on this planet and do our best?
- goatherders 7y ago
  I'll say it again: offer a practical solution and I'll listen. I certainly am not burying my head in the sand and I recognize we as a species have expedited these issues. Point granted. But tell me what's next? Dont link to articles from academics and theoretical posits. Tell me what we actually DO without mandated birth control, resource allowance/ration... I get that we are part of the problem. But that's going to happen again. We can be aggravated that the ignorant population wont get in line or we can talk actual practical solutions. I'm game for a dialog. You go first.
  - nikofeyn 7y ago
    so what are your suggestions, exactly? just allow everyone to do what they want because a slight reduction in that might inconvenience them and things are going to happen anyway so why bother? what are you even arguing for?
- brabel 7y ago
  > a problem without a solution is still a problem. The solutions are well known to a lot of problems we have, we just don't want to talk about them! Why don't we, for example, look at how all these lock downs we are having to do to slow down the virus spread are impacting the environment positively? So, why don't we try some of this on a more permanent basics to slow down climate change?? The effort for me as a person has been incredibly little: just work from home and avoid going to restaurants and public events. That's it! The effect on the economy would certainly be huge, but what is our priority? You know, and I know, the answer.
jamesrcole 7y ago
> Settle down. "The worst of humanity caused this?" It's a virus and our medical system has limits. Shit happens. Sorry to say it, but that just demonstrates a major lack of knowledge of this situation and the events that led up to it and the way it was handled. Some of which go back years. The fact that you think this is just a matter of our medical system. The fact that you think (“shit happens”) that there wasn’t really anything that could have been done. I don’t have the time or energy to dig up a list of thing for you to read but if you want you’ll be able to find stuff if you read around and do some googling. Here’s one thing to read https://www.businessinsider.com.au/bill-gates-warns-the-next-pandemic-disease-is-coming-2018-4?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com.au/bill-gates-warns-the-next...
selestify 7y ago
The first step to solving a problem is admitting that we have one in the first place. Also, the disease itself may not have been our fault, but the sheer incompetence of many countries in dealing with it most certainly is.
onion2k 7y ago
It's a virus and our medical system has limits. Governments shutting down pandemic response units (eg https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/03/14/world/science-health-world/donald-trump-us-disbanded-nsc-pandemic-unit/ https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/03/14/world/science-h...) because there hasn't been a pandemic recently is a self-imposed, short-sighted, and unnecessary limit. It's not fair to say the healthcare system has limits if you're only providing the bare minimum (or less).
- goatherders 7y ago
  Agreed. And shutting 5hat down is a betrayal of those that dont know by those that we trust DO. There are 330 million people in this country (approx) that trust fewer than a couple thousand to guide us safely from pandemics. Those couple thousand are largely controlled by a few dozen whose motivations are political or economic in nature.
- paublyrne 7y ago
  > Governments shutting down pandemic response units One government specifically did this. > It's not fair to say the healthcare system has limits if you're only providing the bare minimum Healthcare systems all over the world are struggling are preparing to struggle in the coming weeks, many of which do not provide only the 'bare minimum' but seek to provide good national coverage. While we'd all love to see more joined up thinking between countries in tackling these kinds of crises both during and before, you're being unnecessarily harsh. We are human after all.
  - taborj 7y ago
    >One government specifically did this. Except they didn't, see my reply above.
- taborj 7y ago
  > Governments shutting down pandemic response units Check your source. This appears to have been disproved. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/16/no-white-house-didnt-dissolve-its-pandemic-response-office/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/16/no-white-...
rorykoehler 7y ago
Why do ethics suddenly matter when short term human inconvenience are a consequence.
hakunin 7y ago
People ate bats; Chinese government covered up the virus for a while; big US pharma wasn’t incentivized to research a solution; underinsured Americans were afraid to go to doctor; immigrants were afraid to go to doctor; US government just sunk trillions into economy (which vanished in mere hours), but can’t promise free tests and treatment for everyone; US government messed up the cautionary messaging; US has no systems in place to handle anything like this. ^ this is a list of problems I read in the news over the past few days. Pretty sure there are a lot of solutions people have been proposing, most of which are completely feasible.
- marnett 7y ago
  As a slight nitpick the US government did not sink any money during this ordeal. The Federal Reserve is not the US Government; it is our somewhat government affiliated private central bank. Bailouts, which are likely to come, will be from the US government through the Treasury, however.
  - barry-cotter 7y ago
    The Fed is a government organ. It is not a private entity. Its debts are the US government’s.
- kd5bjo 7y ago
  There’s nothing that I could have personally done to affect any of the things you’ve listed here. For the vast majority of people, this is just some that’s happened and needs to be dealt with. Occasional devastating diseases have been part of the human condition for millenia, and the global coordination put forth to fight this one is unprecedented which marks real progress. It really wasn’t that long ago that stopping a pandemic at its source became anything more than a fantasy, and it’ll take a few rounds before we get it right.
- xorcist 7y ago
  > underinsured Americans were afraid to go to doctor [...] > US government just sunk trillions into economy These two sentences are just waiting for a punch line.