> We need to discard the destructive idea that isolating some subpopulation is a viable strategy in this epidemic. Why? Tell me how long are you going to isola

> We need to discard the destructive idea that isolating some subpopulation is a viable strategy in this epidemic. Why? Tell me how long are you going to isolate everyone? Years? COVID-19 isn't disappearing after a month or two. It can flare up again. > There's no place to isolate people but their homes, essentially. You either isolate everyone or you're going effectively no one. This is a false dichotomy. You need to build herd immunity in the long run, otherwise you will have to isolate everyone indefinitely to prevent it from spreading again. Of course herd immunity can be achieved by a vaccine, but a "generally considered safe" vaccine will likely take at least a year to materialize and then it is unclear how many people actually want to get it. The idea that "it's just a flu" is still attractive in people's heads. People aren't good at estimating personal risk. > Yeah, these are the deluded and despicable ideas going around. No, the economic cost of dealing with the massive death of any group would be huge. Facts aren't "deluded or despicable". I'm just pointing it out. People over 70 generally are not economically productive, but they do cost a lot in terms of health care and social security, a lot of which is unfunded liabilities. Of course that's an uncomfortable fact, but that doesn't make it any less true. Today this might be something that people are not comfortable pointing out, of course the ruling elite are essentially senior citizens. At some point though, the pitchforks are going to come out. That's what I'm warning you about. I'll point out another fact: During the plague, Jews were big creditors. You can read up on what happened to them. If a crisis meets opportunity, morals go out the window. Count on it.