3 ms·

I'm struggling to understand this comment. The GP is entirely correct here: any thinking adult knows that 5 years of lockdown would cause human suffering on a s

I'm struggling to understand this comment. The GP is entirely correct here: any thinking adult knows that 5 years of lockdown would cause human suffering on a scale unheard of in modern history. There is no correct choice here for policy makers, but an extended lockdown will cause death and suffering as well.

robotron 6y ago
Will it? How do you know? Have we done that before to have an example?
- ac29 6y ago
  Unemployment peaked at 23% in the US during the Great Depression, and that's without many types of business being illegal to operate as is currently the status quo for areas under shelter in place orders right now. Its certainly not a perfect comparison, but the effects of mass unemployment are hardly unknowable, and we'd be lucky to see only 23% unemployment if lockdown orders persist for half a decade.
Jedd 6y ago
'This comment' was asking with what authority fennecfoxen was claiming to know what 'the world at large' would prefer. There was mention of 401k's (something I believe is peculiar to <5% of the world's population). The claim that emergency surgery was impossible during any kind of lockdown (not true, in my understanding). The claim that hospitals would be bankrupt without profitable procedures (something that simply doesn't make sense outside of the USA). The GP is entirely speculative, and claims to speak for an audience that doesn't necessarily agree with them. My question - in response to the claim that the world agrees with them - is what part of the world they are in, and what part do they claim to speak for. I don't understand what there is to understand with this question.
- robjan 6y ago
  Maybe everyone doesn't have 401k, but pretty much every pension scheme around the world is in some way linked to the performance of the stock and bond markets. Even the ones that aren't rely on people being employed and paying taxes.
  - Jedd 6y ago
    This may well be true, but it's only a small part of the equation. The equation evidently (according to OC): take the death count ... versus ... mass unemployment, no basic medical services and cancer screenings Part of the RHS was also most hospitals are bankrupt, and the weird claim that tax revenues are the only way to fund essential services. (I'd suggest cutting costs in other areas - defence, for example - is one way to rediscover funds for essential services.) Anyway, I expect that where you are right now, what you're seeing going on around (aka the level of incompetence exhibited by your leaders / government) along with the usual way your society and economy work, is going to significantly affect which way you lean on that equation. Also if you run the stats and conclude you personally are not likely to be part of the death count, but you would be inconvenienced by a cautious approach, you're probably going to lean towards the '[other] people dying ain't so bad' camp.

robotron 6y ago

Will it? How do you know? Have we done that before to have an example?

ac29 6y ago
Unemployment peaked at 23% in the US during the Great Depression, and that's without many types of business being illegal to operate as is currently the status quo for areas under shelter in place orders right now. Its certainly not a perfect comparison, but the effects of mass unemployment are hardly unknowable, and we'd be lucky to see only 23% unemployment if lockdown orders persist for half a decade.

Jedd 6y ago

'This comment' was asking with what authority fennecfoxen was claiming to know what 'the world at large' would prefer. There was mention of 401k's (something I believe is peculiar to <5% of the world's population). The claim that emergency surgery was impossible during any kind of lockdown (not true, in my understanding). The claim that hospitals would be bankrupt without profitable procedures (something that simply doesn't make sense outside of the USA). The GP is entirely speculative, and claims to speak for an audience that doesn't necessarily agree with them. My question - in response to the claim that the world agrees with them - is what part of the world they are in, and what part do they claim to speak for. I don't understand what there is to understand with this question.

robjan 6y ago
Maybe everyone doesn't have 401k, but pretty much every pension scheme around the world is in some way linked to the performance of the stock and bond markets. Even the ones that aren't rely on people being employed and paying taxes.
- Jedd 6y ago
  This may well be true, but it's only a small part of the equation. The equation evidently (according to OC): take the death count ... versus ... mass unemployment, no basic medical services and cancer screenings Part of the RHS was also most hospitals are bankrupt, and the weird claim that tax revenues are the only way to fund essential services. (I'd suggest cutting costs in other areas - defence, for example - is one way to rediscover funds for essential services.) Anyway, I expect that where you are right now, what you're seeing going on around (aka the level of incompetence exhibited by your leaders / government) along with the usual way your society and economy work, is going to significantly affect which way you lean on that equation. Also if you run the stats and conclude you personally are not likely to be part of the death count, but you would be inconvenienced by a cautious approach, you're probably going to lean towards the '[other] people dying ain't so bad' camp.