3 ms·
> Approx 1% deaths. Which I think is acceptable, to allow 99% of the population to be able to return to a normal life so quickly. That's 100 million people dea
by e12e 5y ago
> Approx 1% deaths. Which I think is acceptable, to allow 99% of the population to be able to return to a normal life so quickly.
That's 100 million people dead, globally? And higher than UK deaths during WW2?
https://topforeignstocks.com/2016/04/19/chart-world-war-ii-casualties-as-a-percentage-of-each-countrys-population/ https://topforeignstocks.com/2016/04/19/chart-world-war-ii-c...
- mattowen_uk 5y agoI have very low EQ, so yes, 100m globally (Actually 77.9m) vs 7.8 billion is totally acceptable (to me).
- e12e 5y agoI'm not sure if "low EQ" is an explanation here - it would lead to indifference regarding deaths and "return to a normal life so quickly", no ? Or is "population" a proxy for "me"?
- mattowen_uk 5y agoIt's a stats thing, plus a factual thing. I personally don't care much about the wellbeing of others, but I do understand based on what I read, that for the majority of people, they don't like dying, lockdowns, or masks etc. So from that I can extrapolate that people want a 'return to a normal life quickly', as opposed to living with Covid over an extended time period. > Or is "population" à proxy for "me"? Absolutely not. I am totally fine with my splendid isolation. Most of the world could burn for all I care. The human race hasn't done me much favours in my life, so why should I care about people I don't even know? I also upvoted you, not because I like you, but because you took the time to engage in dialogue.