4 ms·

Sadly I think the effect might be the opposite. The massive financial hardship seems poised for a backlash where a group promoting 'economy above all else' will

by sago 7y ago

Sadly I think the effect might be the opposite. The massive financial hardship seems poised for a backlash where a group promoting 'economy above all else' will gain the support of millions who feel their financial future has been unfairly taken. I see little threads fraying already. I have heard even normally fairly left-leaning people saying variations of 'this will kill more people from poverty'.

steveeq1 7y ago
What if that ends up being true?
- vharuck 7y ago
  It might be. But I think the takeaway from "we either let people die from the virus or die from slipping in our economy" should be "let's have an economy that's more robust to disasters."
  - steveeq1 7y ago
    That's a straw-man argument that no reasonable would disagree with.
  - Mirioron 7y ago
    How do you have an economy that's more robust against disasters? The economy is built on work. If people aren't working then there's no economy. The only way around it is production by robots.
- sago 7y ago
  I think that's also a worrying possibility. It might be true. Whether or not you think 'left-leaning' is the correct ideology, I would expect more left-leaning people to reject the 'either-or'. But to think that the government should be enacting policies to avoid casualties from both disease and poverty, not choosing one or the other. I.e. distributing the financial damage across everyone in proportion to their existing affluence.