3 ms·
If someone has an acute problem with low blood sugar, do you let them die right now because increasing their blood sugar won't cure diabetes? This is how insane
by perl4ever 7y ago
If someone has an acute problem with low blood sugar, do you let them die right now because increasing their blood sugar won't cure diabetes? This is how insane people sound to me right now.
And from what I've read, this is how the great depression was created - people said "oh, the banks that are failing are weak, so they should fail".
- SilasX 7y agoExcept the patient we're trying to save is the market, not any one business, and malignant businesses are like cancer. It's important for the cancer to die so the patient can live. I mean, if you want to debate this thing entirely in analogies.
- perl4ever 7y agoI think the average person, or at least the average internet commenter, is too ready to consider large sectors of the economy "malignant" even in the best of times. But without debating which analogy is right, it does matter whether it's cancer or not. And if aggressive treatment of advanced cancer involves cutting out major organs and the patient will only survive a month longer at best, it makes more sense to assume it's not terminal cancer and act accordingly even if there's a chance. If someone appears to have a seizure and/or falls down and passes out, it could be a stroke, they could have cancer that's metastasized everywhere, but you don't make that assumption when there are many easily treatable possibilities.