3 ms·

While I understood lockdown measures, know that this is your privilege talking. You can stay in lockdown because you're middle class living in a wealthy country

While I understood lockdown measures, know that this is your privilege talking. You can stay in lockdown because you're middle class living in a wealthy country. In countries like India lockdown can cost far more than what Covid-19 can do. I'm not arguing against public health measures, when the cost to me is low or when accompanied by evidence. So where's the evidence that tracing apps work? That South Korea does it and South Korea manages to keep Covid-19 under control, that's not evidence. Plenty of confounders like the massive testing they did, their discipline in wearing masks, etc. And note that I'm not a denier. I do think 1% mortality is unacceptable, plus it appears that's not the only problem. High hospitalization rates, permanent heart and lung damage, etc. Still not willing to trade my privacy away, sorry. You're free to do that but I'm willing to fight for mine.

BrandoElFollito 6y ago
> 'm not arguing against public health measures, when the cost to me is low or when accompanied by evidence. Sometime there are no clear evidences, just suppositions - or the individual cost is not insignificant. In that case you should not be surprised to be forced to stay at home, similarly to not being allowed in a school when not vaccinated. You decide to pose a risk to society - you must face the consequences. My wife is immuno-depressed so people, for their comfort and freedom decide to be a danger are my personal enemies. I want to make sure they are forced to stay at home with their liberty with them. Only when you cooperate with society "for the greater good" then you are free to express your freedom publicly. This is not something philosophical - it is life at stake for some people.
- bad_user 6y ago
  I'm sorry for your immuno-depressed wife. I also have family members over 60 that would be at higher risk if they contacted Covid-19. And I'm an asthmatic and asthmatics are at higher risk. But that's still not a reason to have my privacy traded away. And if you're going to treat me like the enemy, willing to trade my freedoms away, for your safety, then don't be surprised if I'm going to treat you like an enemy too. --- I'm totally fine with vaccination btw. That's a really poor analogy b/c vaccination is the best evidence-based strategy we have for fighting viruses and it's a one time cost to pay. To be honest, even if contact tracing apps had evidence that they work somewhat, I'd still not trade my privacy away. I only pointed out the lack of evidence because it is absurd to give up your freedoms on something that may or may not work. In any case, I'd rather catch the virus.
  - BrandoElFollito 6y ago
    > And if you're going to treat me like the enemy, willing to trade my freedoms away, for your safety, then don't be surprised if I'm going to treat you like an enemy too. Yes of course, this is normal. And that's why I am actively working for a legal framework to coerce people into staying at home in these cases. I highlight the word "legal" as otherwise it will be chaos. > That's a really poor analogy b/c vaccination is the best evidence-based strategy we have for fighting viruses and it's a one time cost to pay. In some cases we need to be proactive without string evidence. In the case of COVID-19 this is not a matter of being psychologically comfortable (as opposed to, say, religion where anything goes for me, at least until it does not directly hits others). It is a matter to use that until we have better solutions. > In any case, I'd rather catch the virus. This is your choice. Please just make sure to keep it to yourself and also to realize that you will be using a medical facility overloaded by people who not only caught it willingly, but also those ones who did not. But no matter what I really do hope you will not catch it :)
Barrin92 6y ago
It's not my privilege talking I don't think. In my country we're down to a few hundred cases per day and I have gone physically back to work since early June, business is looking up again. That's the wrong trade-off I'm talking about. Yes, the lockdowns and measures hurt both privacy and economics, but not dealing with it hurts people more, both privileged and non-privileged, there are no winners. Imagine in a country with 300 million people, if covid is not controlled it will cause tens of millions of hospitalizations, heart/lung damages, millions of stroke victims, the damage to liberty and prosperity is immeasurable. In a country like India there will not even be resources to appropriately care for everyone. I also don't have a strong opinion about the apps in particular, just the general point. In Taiwan they gave everyone phones and manually checked on them every day. Quick, temporary restrictions have already enabled them to go back to normal life.
- bad_user 6y ago
  > Yes, the lockdowns and measures hurt both privacy and economics, but not dealing with it hurts people more, both privileged and non-privileged, there are no winners. For western countries, we agree, economists are pretty much in agreement that the lockdown measures have been good (although the long term outlook isn't looking good). For poorer countries, like India, that's simply not true. When you've got a country of young people that are literally dying of hunger if they can't go to work, a 1% fatality rate starts to sound pretty good ;-) And this is even true for the poor in the US as well. People are freaking out because they lack a social safety net and even the less fortunate in the middle class have burned through their savings. Good luck explaining to them that it's for their own good, because it isn't. It's for your own good, not theirs. It's privilege because you and I can afford to stay at home. People also judge such measures via what they can and can't afford. It's not bad to be privileged, but we need to recognize the position we are in. And if you want to force people to stay at home, fine, but be prepared to pay the bill for it ;-)

BrandoElFollito 6y ago

> 'm not arguing against public health measures, when the cost to me is low or when accompanied by evidence. Sometime there are no clear evidences, just suppositions - or the individual cost is not insignificant. In that case you should not be surprised to be forced to stay at home, similarly to not being allowed in a school when not vaccinated. You decide to pose a risk to society - you must face the consequences. My wife is immuno-depressed so people, for their comfort and freedom decide to be a danger are my personal enemies. I want to make sure they are forced to stay at home with their liberty with them. Only when you cooperate with society "for the greater good" then you are free to express your freedom publicly. This is not something philosophical - it is life at stake for some people.

bad_user 6y ago
I'm sorry for your immuno-depressed wife. I also have family members over 60 that would be at higher risk if they contacted Covid-19. And I'm an asthmatic and asthmatics are at higher risk. But that's still not a reason to have my privacy traded away. And if you're going to treat me like the enemy, willing to trade my freedoms away, for your safety, then don't be surprised if I'm going to treat you like an enemy too. --- I'm totally fine with vaccination btw. That's a really poor analogy b/c vaccination is the best evidence-based strategy we have for fighting viruses and it's a one time cost to pay. To be honest, even if contact tracing apps had evidence that they work somewhat, I'd still not trade my privacy away. I only pointed out the lack of evidence because it is absurd to give up your freedoms on something that may or may not work. In any case, I'd rather catch the virus.
- BrandoElFollito 6y ago
  > And if you're going to treat me like the enemy, willing to trade my freedoms away, for your safety, then don't be surprised if I'm going to treat you like an enemy too. Yes of course, this is normal. And that's why I am actively working for a legal framework to coerce people into staying at home in these cases. I highlight the word "legal" as otherwise it will be chaos. > That's a really poor analogy b/c vaccination is the best evidence-based strategy we have for fighting viruses and it's a one time cost to pay. In some cases we need to be proactive without string evidence. In the case of COVID-19 this is not a matter of being psychologically comfortable (as opposed to, say, religion where anything goes for me, at least until it does not directly hits others). It is a matter to use that until we have better solutions. > In any case, I'd rather catch the virus. This is your choice. Please just make sure to keep it to yourself and also to realize that you will be using a medical facility overloaded by people who not only caught it willingly, but also those ones who did not. But no matter what I really do hope you will not catch it :)

Barrin92 6y ago

It's not my privilege talking I don't think. In my country we're down to a few hundred cases per day and I have gone physically back to work since early June, business is looking up again. That's the wrong trade-off I'm talking about. Yes, the lockdowns and measures hurt both privacy and economics, but not dealing with it hurts people more, both privileged and non-privileged, there are no winners. Imagine in a country with 300 million people, if covid is not controlled it will cause tens of millions of hospitalizations, heart/lung damages, millions of stroke victims, the damage to liberty and prosperity is immeasurable. In a country like India there will not even be resources to appropriately care for everyone. I also don't have a strong opinion about the apps in particular, just the general point. In Taiwan they gave everyone phones and manually checked on them every day. Quick, temporary restrictions have already enabled them to go back to normal life.

bad_user 6y ago
> Yes, the lockdowns and measures hurt both privacy and economics, but not dealing with it hurts people more, both privileged and non-privileged, there are no winners. For western countries, we agree, economists are pretty much in agreement that the lockdown measures have been good (although the long term outlook isn't looking good). For poorer countries, like India, that's simply not true. When you've got a country of young people that are literally dying of hunger if they can't go to work, a 1% fatality rate starts to sound pretty good ;-) And this is even true for the poor in the US as well. People are freaking out because they lack a social safety net and even the less fortunate in the middle class have burned through their savings. Good luck explaining to them that it's for their own good, because it isn't. It's for your own good, not theirs. It's privilege because you and I can afford to stay at home. People also judge such measures via what they can and can't afford. It's not bad to be privileged, but we need to recognize the position we are in. And if you want to force people to stay at home, fine, but be prepared to pay the bill for it ;-)