3 ms·

I dream of a world where we could discuss the complex trade offs involved in the situation without people accusing others of just wanting to sacrifice workers t

I dream of a world where we could discuss the complex trade offs involved in the situation without people accusing others of just wanting to sacrifice workers to a volcano god.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
scarmig 6y ago
There's a certain richness to demanding regular people carefully evaluate scientific evidence and the subtleties of different policy choices and be willing to risk their lives for the sake of the common good, while the person who is driving all these decisions is on stage suggesting everyone drink bleach.
asginitnio 6y ago
The world is frequently black and white. It isn't immature to say so. In this situation, I think there are no complex tradeoffs. If you disagree, tell us what the tradeoffs are rather than making a high-minded appeal to moderation.
- winstonewert 6y ago
  Obviously, on the one hand we have risks posed by the virus. That itself is complicated because of everything we don't know. Will we be able to create a vaccine? Does the lockdown actually save lives or just delay deaths until the lockdown is lifted? Exactly how deadly is the virus? How much of the population has already had the virus? If we stop the lockdown, will healthcare be overwhelmed? On the other hand, we have the cessation of useful work. That's going to have consequences. There are reports of crops going to waste because they can't be harvested. The lost productivity will lower everyone's standard of living, which will translate into additional deaths. The isolation imposed during the lockdown will also damage people's mental health. So, yes, I think there is a complex trade-off and I think its immature and naive to think otherwise.
bsder 6y ago
Because there is no "complex tradeoff". We should stay the hell locked down. BUT ... If you REALLY wanted workers to go back to work, give them $2,000 per month WHETHER THEY ARE WORKING OR NOT and reopen. People can also make their own choices as to whether they think they should go back to work. Best of all worlds right? Republicans get to demonstrate that people really do want to go back to work, individuals get to make the final decision thus indicating personal liberty, and the people working and getting $2000 would help restart the demand side of the economy. The problem is that the Republican leaders want to DENY $2,000 a month (HAHAHAHAHA! Like anybody on unemployment is getting that ...) and instead we have "snitch lines" to force people back to work. "Coercion" is not a complex tradeoff, thanks.
- wmeredith 6y ago
  Where is the $2000/month you’re talking about coming from?

I dream of a world where we could discuss the complex trade offs involved in the situation without people accusing others of just wanting to sacrifice workers to a volcano god.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

scarmig 6y ago

There's a certain richness to demanding regular people carefully evaluate scientific evidence and the subtleties of different policy choices and be willing to risk their lives for the sake of the common good, while the person who is driving all these decisions is on stage suggesting everyone drink bleach.

asginitnio 6y ago

The world is frequently black and white. It isn't immature to say so. In this situation, I think there are no complex tradeoffs. If you disagree, tell us what the tradeoffs are rather than making a high-minded appeal to moderation.

winstonewert 6y ago
Obviously, on the one hand we have risks posed by the virus. That itself is complicated because of everything we don't know. Will we be able to create a vaccine? Does the lockdown actually save lives or just delay deaths until the lockdown is lifted? Exactly how deadly is the virus? How much of the population has already had the virus? If we stop the lockdown, will healthcare be overwhelmed? On the other hand, we have the cessation of useful work. That's going to have consequences. There are reports of crops going to waste because they can't be harvested. The lost productivity will lower everyone's standard of living, which will translate into additional deaths. The isolation imposed during the lockdown will also damage people's mental health. So, yes, I think there is a complex trade-off and I think its immature and naive to think otherwise.

bsder 6y ago

Because there is no "complex tradeoff". We should stay the hell locked down. BUT ... If you REALLY wanted workers to go back to work, give them $2,000 per month WHETHER THEY ARE WORKING OR NOT and reopen. People can also make their own choices as to whether they think they should go back to work. Best of all worlds right? Republicans get to demonstrate that people really do want to go back to work, individuals get to make the final decision thus indicating personal liberty, and the people working and getting $2000 would help restart the demand side of the economy. The problem is that the Republican leaders want to DENY $2,000 a month (HAHAHAHAHA! Like anybody on unemployment is getting that ...) and instead we have "snitch lines" to force people back to work. "Coercion" is not a complex tradeoff, thanks.

wmeredith 6y ago
Where is the $2000/month you’re talking about coming from?