5 ms·

The deaths in NY,LA,CA, and MI include many,many people under 70. Also, you’ve responded several times without answering my question: How many of your family,

• ceilingcorner 7y ago
  Yes, many people under 70 have died. Hundreds, perhaps a thousand, all of which are tragedies. People also die from a variety of other diseases, accidents, and other things on a regular basis in numbers that dwarf the coronavirus. Yet, we don't shut down society over it. > How many of your family, friends, and acquaintances are you willing to put up for the experiment? This kind of snarky comment is precisely the problem. I'm not "willing to put up my friends" for experiment, because this isn't some zero sum game with simple answers. As I have said a dozen times now: it is a complicated situation and this "but people are dying, so we have to be as draconian as possible" take is extremely shortsighted. There are millions of people that will now have serious problems because of the total shutdown. Here's a number for you: > 45,000 – or one in five – suicides a year worldwide to unemployment, with a further 5,000 deaths caused by the economic crisis. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/02/the-link-between-unemployment-and-suicide/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/02/the-link-between-unem... 45,000 people a year kill themselves because of unemployment. And that's just after 2008. We are apparently headed for a far worse crisis. Have you considered the possibility that completely shutting down everything for months on end will result in more chaos and death than the virus itself? Even worse, this is entirely unpredictable?