> I haven't decided if I agree with the position that collapsing the economy is worse than letting those deaths happen Have you considered the position that a

> I haven't decided if I agree with the position that collapsing the economy is worse than letting those deaths happen Have you considered the position that a collapsed economy is inevitable due to deaths? Or that it would lead to less pollution, saving lives (although who knows what the net-net would be)? 7M people die annually from air pollution, according to the WHO. Early estimates of pollution reduction are in the 20-50% range; even a sustained 5% reduction is 350k lives saved/year.