4 ms·
Those fees are for everyone's safety. If other people have deliveries, I'm less likely to get sick and die. Delivery fees should be part of the stimulus. If e
by wegs 7y ago
Those fees are for everyone's safety. If other people have deliveries, I'm less likely to get sick and die.
Delivery fees should be part of the stimulus.
If everyone who can afford them paid delivery fees for everyone who can't, we'd all come out way ahead, both health-wise and economically. This is one of the biggest economic no-brainers since some states started making everyone wear a $2 cloth face mask to reduce R0.
- standardUser 7y ago"If other people have deliveries, I'm less likely to get sick and die." Outside of the very worst-hit parts of the world, going shopping while taking precautions does not seem to be capable of raising the transmission rate to unacceptable levels. We're not trying to prevent every and all infection, only to keep the rate of new infections at a sustainable level.
- wegs 6y agoWhy do you say that? The US seems to have an R0 of right around 1 with lockdowns. Shopping is the major place people continue to intermingle. If we brought R0<<1, the virus would die off. If R0 > 1, we all get sick eventually. And aside from that, school and work closures are much more expensive than food delivery. The ROI of not having everyone congregate in stores seems huge in comparison.
- standardUser 6y agoI say that because I don't think anyone expects the virus to die off, save for a mutation or herd immunity (via vaccine or otherwise). Lockdowns are not and never were intended to kill the virus. Only to control the spread.