3 ms·
It's not necessarily that people are taking human life lightly, just that priorities may not be the same for everyone. In the UK we've already had cancer patie
by dingaling 7y ago
It's not necessarily that people are taking human life lightly, just that priorities may not be the same for everyone.
In the UK we've already had cancer patients who have died because their treatment was cancelled to free-up hospitals for COVID patients. Nine murders have been attributed to people not being able to cope with lockdown in their own homes. Why are the lives of ( primarily ) old people with comorbidities considered of higher priority than them?
Pragmatically one could argue that economically and socially it would be fairer to just let people who contract COVID die. But politics intervenes and forbids that.
- gitrog 7y ago> Pragmatically one could argue that economically and socially it would be fairer to just let people who contract COVID die. But politics intervenes and forbids that. Really? And what if two thirds of the world contracted it and ~3% of those died. I ask you to provide your own proof, models or what not, that letting this virus run rampant won't have equally or even more disastrous affects economically and socially.