4 ms·

Here’s the thing, and I suspect I’m not alone in feeling this way: I really think I would agree with you in normal circumstances. But there is so much politica

Here’s the thing, and I suspect I’m not alone in feeling this way: I really think I would agree with you in normal circumstances. But there is so much political pressure from groups who are downplaying the virus altogether, to just ignore the virus and go back to business as usual, that I suspect a lot of less-than-ethical ulterior motives are at work. So I feel a very real “allergic reaction” to anyone who says we need to just reopen things. Maybe it’s because politicians in the US have turned the whole question into a wedge issue to oversimplify things and get voters on their sides, I dunno. But the question on when/whether we can return to normal is a very serious one that needs to be something we all understand and agree on, and I’m worried that’ll never happen. Our priorities are simply too far out of alignment.

TechBro8615 7y ago
No, you're not alone in feeling this way. But I would assert that most people who feel this way are currently employed or have significant savings. It's easy to comment on hacker news from your cushy WFH job about "those silly protestors who want to re-open the economy." But there is a reason they are so frustrated. They are people who have been living paycheck-to-paycheck and suddenly find themselves without a job, but with bills still arriving and kids still asking for food on the table. They want the world to be healthy, too. They don't want to endanger you or themselves. But they want to feed their families.
- infecto 7y ago
  Well said. I think there are valid arguments from both sides. I wish it was not drowned out by the extreme flag flying gun toting, virus is a hoax folks. I think there is a middle ground. We cannot be on lockdown for a year, lets be realistic. Even if the virus persists, the world or even a single country just could not sustain that. And on the opposite side, we cannot open up too quickly. I know China's data is not accurate but we can at least communicate with people inside of the country and we know life is getting more back to normal there. So we can see that we also have to stay closed enough that the first large wave does not devastate the system. It is just a shame though that we can not have dialogue about the science and data behind this. And instead it becomes an extreme from both sides.
- Jedd 7y ago
  > They want the world to be healthy, too. They don't want to endanger you or themselves. From outside the USA watching these protests -- it's possible more weight is being given to certain (less favourable / sensible) aspects of the message they're trying to send, but we're seeing things like 'If you're sick - come along to the protest' and 'We don't want people wearing masks'.
- mcphage 7y ago
  > But they want to feed their families. That doesn't explain the prevalence of "I WANT A HAIRCUT!" and "I WANT TO GOLF!" signs. The protests seem to mostly be "I want people to work for me", rather than "I want to work".
  - leereeves 7y ago
    The people choosing which photos to publish clearly want to discredit the protests. I haven't seen a single photo of a sign making a persuasive point.
    - mcphage 7y ago
      If you find some, please share. Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence, sure, but Absence of Evidence is also not Proof of Presence.
      - leereeves 7y ago
        Ok, I went looking, instead of merely seeing photos in the media I usually read, and I found several. Here are a couple in one photo [1]: > Earning a living is essential > I want my job back Or [2]: > Free people make their own risk assessments Shame we have to look to the Indian press for fair coverage of these protests in the US. 1: https://c.ndtvimg.com/2020-04/b70u23q_us-protest650_625x300_19_April_20.jpg https://c.ndtvimg.com/2020-04/b70u23q_us-protest650_625x300_... 2: http://www.dailyaddaa.com/world-news/us-covid-19-live-free-or-die-hundreds-protest-against-lockdown-rules-4911745.html http://www.dailyaddaa.com/world-news/us-covid-19-live-free-o...
        mcphage 7y ago
        Well, that's some—good find. It's a shame that the person who led the protests in my city was a wealthy real estate mogul.
fennecfoxen 7y ago
We don’t need to “just” reopen things as a kneejerk reaction. We will need to reopen things sometime. But from the earliest lockdowns, all the forecasts have been that about 60% of the world population ultimately gets infected anyway. The lockdowns are about making that happen in a more orderly way, one that doesn’t absolutely crush our hospitals, ICUs, ventilator capacity, and our stocks of PPE. That’s what we’re buying with the lockdowns. That’s where the lives are being saved. That makes sense, for a while. That doesn’t make sense for five years. The question is where the line goes in between, and I really don’t know exactly where. We may have passed it or it may be months ahead. Just remember that even if we are right to call for a much longer lockdown, we shouldn’t go all William Bligh about it, condescending to abuse people who are stubborn and wrong for their stupidity on the matter. Such an approach is anti-leadership; it gets you senseless mutinies instead of buy-in. (See also: Bill de Blasio enjoying the amenities of the Park Slope YMCA mere moments before shutting down all the gyms. Not a great way to build solidarity.)

TechBro8615 7y ago

No, you're not alone in feeling this way. But I would assert that most people who feel this way are currently employed or have significant savings. It's easy to comment on hacker news from your cushy WFH job about "those silly protestors who want to re-open the economy." But there is a reason they are so frustrated. They are people who have been living paycheck-to-paycheck and suddenly find themselves without a job, but with bills still arriving and kids still asking for food on the table. They want the world to be healthy, too. They don't want to endanger you or themselves. But they want to feed their families.

infecto 7y ago
Well said. I think there are valid arguments from both sides. I wish it was not drowned out by the extreme flag flying gun toting, virus is a hoax folks. I think there is a middle ground. We cannot be on lockdown for a year, lets be realistic. Even if the virus persists, the world or even a single country just could not sustain that. And on the opposite side, we cannot open up too quickly. I know China's data is not accurate but we can at least communicate with people inside of the country and we know life is getting more back to normal there. So we can see that we also have to stay closed enough that the first large wave does not devastate the system. It is just a shame though that we can not have dialogue about the science and data behind this. And instead it becomes an extreme from both sides.
Jedd 7y ago
> They want the world to be healthy, too. They don't want to endanger you or themselves. From outside the USA watching these protests -- it's possible more weight is being given to certain (less favourable / sensible) aspects of the message they're trying to send, but we're seeing things like 'If you're sick - come along to the protest' and 'We don't want people wearing masks'.
mcphage 7y ago
> But they want to feed their families. That doesn't explain the prevalence of "I WANT A HAIRCUT!" and "I WANT TO GOLF!" signs. The protests seem to mostly be "I want people to work for me", rather than "I want to work".
- leereeves 7y ago
  The people choosing which photos to publish clearly want to discredit the protests. I haven't seen a single photo of a sign making a persuasive point.
  - mcphage 7y ago
    If you find some, please share. Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence, sure, but Absence of Evidence is also not Proof of Presence.
    - leereeves 7y ago
      Ok, I went looking, instead of merely seeing photos in the media I usually read, and I found several. Here are a couple in one photo [1]: > Earning a living is essential > I want my job back Or [2]: > Free people make their own risk assessments Shame we have to look to the Indian press for fair coverage of these protests in the US. 1: https://c.ndtvimg.com/2020-04/b70u23q_us-protest650_625x300_19_April_20.jpg https://c.ndtvimg.com/2020-04/b70u23q_us-protest650_625x300_... 2: http://www.dailyaddaa.com/world-news/us-covid-19-live-free-or-die-hundreds-protest-against-lockdown-rules-4911745.html http://www.dailyaddaa.com/world-news/us-covid-19-live-free-o...
      - mcphage 7y ago
        Well, that's some—good find. It's a shame that the person who led the protests in my city was a wealthy real estate mogul.

fennecfoxen 7y ago

We don’t need to “just” reopen things as a kneejerk reaction. We will need to reopen things sometime. But from the earliest lockdowns, all the forecasts have been that about 60% of the world population ultimately gets infected anyway. The lockdowns are about making that happen in a more orderly way, one that doesn’t absolutely crush our hospitals, ICUs, ventilator capacity, and our stocks of PPE. That’s what we’re buying with the lockdowns. That’s where the lives are being saved. That makes sense, for a while. That doesn’t make sense for five years. The question is where the line goes in between, and I really don’t know exactly where. We may have passed it or it may be months ahead. Just remember that even if we are right to call for a much longer lockdown, we shouldn’t go all William Bligh about it, condescending to abuse people who are stubborn and wrong for their stupidity on the matter. Such an approach is anti-leadership; it gets you senseless mutinies instead of buy-in. (See also: Bill de Blasio enjoying the amenities of the Park Slope YMCA mere moments before shutting down all the gyms. Not a great way to build solidarity.)