4 ms·
Yeah, hence my mention of fatality rates. It shines a light for reason that the magnitude of 100k is massive. It’s easy for us to lose sight of that, as it’s j
by jwilber 6y ago
Yeah, hence my mention of fatality rates.
It shines a light for reason that the magnitude of 100k is massive. It’s easy for us to lose sight of that, as it’s just another statistic to us (I’m guilty of this as well).
My point with the comparison was that the same number of deaths (100k) for the bubonic plague helps out things into comparison.
Make no mistake that the US’s reaction to the virus is objectively awful. I tried to get tested earlier this week and still have no progress.
To assume a political stance on me (in this case, that I’m pro-Obama Democrat) seems like the real “flamebait” at hand.
I hope getting called for writing something that’s clearly the product of partisan propaganda will cause you to reflect on your stances.
- umvi 6y agoIn an absolute sense 100k is massive. But it's not particularly useful to think in absolutes. It's more useful to think in relative terms, because relativity scales, absolutes do not scale. "300 people died" Is that a massive amount of people? Hard to tell without knowing the relative context "300 people died out of 1.2 billion in India due to prions" vs. "300 people died in an airplane crash. There were no survivors" One of those 2 things will probably result in outrage and calls for policy change/investigation, the other probably will not.