4 ms·

We did ban smoking in public spaces because of the same reasoning as with Covid - it's ok to do dumb things that affect yourself, but not if it affects others.

josephcsible 5y ago
Why don't we ban driving? We'd save a lot of lives lost to car crashes. And a lot of those lives are passengers and pedestrians, i.e., "others".
- galago 5y ago
  Driving is heavily regulated in terms of what kind of cars are legal and how and where they can be operated. Its just a matter of degrees and cost/benefit as assessed by the public. We don't ban driving outright but be ban all kinds of automotive use.
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    > Its just a matter of degrees and cost/benefit as assessed by the public. That's the point, though: COVID lockdowns happened even though much of the public said the benefits of locking down weren't worth the costs.
    - nwiswell 5y ago
      > much of the public Was it at least half of the public, though? Just because cars are a less contentious subject doesn't mean that public opinion doesn't ultimately dictate how they are regulated.
- nwiswell 5y ago
  Because the modern world depends on the automobile, and from a utilitarian point of view the modern world has still had a positive effect on life expectancy. Car culture should not be a foregone conclusion, though -- you are right about that. Many European nations -- the Netherlands being the typical example -- have done a pretty good job of fostering a bike culture in their cities. But us Americans sure love our cars, and so it's ultimately a political question, not a moral one.
- zacmps 5y ago
  I find this thread quite amusing. Starting with covid we have examples of other things which cause large amounts of death, with the intention being to normalize these large-scale causes of mortality. * Smoking: Is being phased out in much of the developed world, with various restrictions, taxes, etc * Obesity: Widely recognized as a problem, with attempts such as sugar taxes, etc. Solutions are less widely agreed upon, but the fact that is a problem is not in question. * Driving: Again, road toll is a known issue which we try to reduce. Driving itself should likely be reduced but the bigger motivation is climate related.
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    > Starting with covid we have examples of other things which cause large amounts of death, with the intention being to normalize these large-scale causes of mortality. The intent isn't to normalize anything. The intent is to show that COVID is unique among things that cause large amounts of death in that for some reason, people are all too willing to sacrifice all of their freedom and privacy over it. > * Driving: Again, road toll is a known issue which we try to reduce. Yes, we try to reduce it. But not by saying "driving is illegal now because it kills people."
- lhorie 5y ago
  Can we just take a moment to appreciate the irony of saying that the measures against covid "don't justify the costs" when the article literally says more people have died (either directly from covid or indirectly) during the pandemic than from smoking/obesity/car accidents? The number of deaths even is lower than it could've been because countries implemented all sorts of draconian measures until vaccinations rolled out, so y'all appear to be simultaneously arguing that there should be more covid deaths cus freedom and/or we should make larger sacrifices to economic activity for lesser causes. Either way, it strikes me as a weak argument.
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    > more people have died (either directly from covid or indirectly) during the pandemic than from smoking/obesity/car accidents The word "indirectly" is the key there. A lot of the excess deaths were because of the measures against COVID, such as cancer cases that went undiagnosed while they were treatable because people had to cancel their checkups, or methanol poisoning because everyone was suddenly manufacturing their own hand sanitizer, often unsafely.
    - lhorie 5y ago
      "A lot" is a modifier you can put in the front of whatever factor supports a given narrative. A lot of people got turned away by overwhelmed hospital staff. A lot of people live in China. A lot of people died in India (which has poorer medical infrastructure than US). A lot of US Republicans died for not following CDC advice. A lot of covid deaths happened in short spiky bursts. One can weave a quite different narrative from those points (one that supports policies like Australia's or China's, for example)
    - cycrutchfield 5y ago
      > A lot of the excess deaths were because of the measures against COVID, such as cancer cases that went undiagnosed while they were treatable because people had to cancel their checkups, or methanol poisoning because everyone was suddenly manufacturing their own hand sanitizer, often unsafely. Such a claim simply beggars belief. Please cite some figures that back up your assertions.

josephcsible 5y ago

Why don't we ban driving? We'd save a lot of lives lost to car crashes. And a lot of those lives are passengers and pedestrians, i.e., "others".

galago 5y ago
Driving is heavily regulated in terms of what kind of cars are legal and how and where they can be operated. Its just a matter of degrees and cost/benefit as assessed by the public. We don't ban driving outright but be ban all kinds of automotive use.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  > Its just a matter of degrees and cost/benefit as assessed by the public. That's the point, though: COVID lockdowns happened even though much of the public said the benefits of locking down weren't worth the costs.
  - nwiswell 5y ago
    > much of the public Was it at least half of the public, though? Just because cars are a less contentious subject doesn't mean that public opinion doesn't ultimately dictate how they are regulated.
nwiswell 5y ago
Because the modern world depends on the automobile, and from a utilitarian point of view the modern world has still had a positive effect on life expectancy. Car culture should not be a foregone conclusion, though -- you are right about that. Many European nations -- the Netherlands being the typical example -- have done a pretty good job of fostering a bike culture in their cities. But us Americans sure love our cars, and so it's ultimately a political question, not a moral one.
zacmps 5y ago
I find this thread quite amusing. Starting with covid we have examples of other things which cause large amounts of death, with the intention being to normalize these large-scale causes of mortality. * Smoking: Is being phased out in much of the developed world, with various restrictions, taxes, etc * Obesity: Widely recognized as a problem, with attempts such as sugar taxes, etc. Solutions are less widely agreed upon, but the fact that is a problem is not in question. * Driving: Again, road toll is a known issue which we try to reduce. Driving itself should likely be reduced but the bigger motivation is climate related.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  > Starting with covid we have examples of other things which cause large amounts of death, with the intention being to normalize these large-scale causes of mortality. The intent isn't to normalize anything. The intent is to show that COVID is unique among things that cause large amounts of death in that for some reason, people are all too willing to sacrifice all of their freedom and privacy over it. > * Driving: Again, road toll is a known issue which we try to reduce. Yes, we try to reduce it. But not by saying "driving is illegal now because it kills people."
lhorie 5y ago
Can we just take a moment to appreciate the irony of saying that the measures against covid "don't justify the costs" when the article literally says more people have died (either directly from covid or indirectly) during the pandemic than from smoking/obesity/car accidents? The number of deaths even is lower than it could've been because countries implemented all sorts of draconian measures until vaccinations rolled out, so y'all appear to be simultaneously arguing that there should be more covid deaths cus freedom and/or we should make larger sacrifices to economic activity for lesser causes. Either way, it strikes me as a weak argument.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  > more people have died (either directly from covid or indirectly) during the pandemic than from smoking/obesity/car accidents The word "indirectly" is the key there. A lot of the excess deaths were because of the measures against COVID, such as cancer cases that went undiagnosed while they were treatable because people had to cancel their checkups, or methanol poisoning because everyone was suddenly manufacturing their own hand sanitizer, often unsafely.
  - lhorie 5y ago
    "A lot" is a modifier you can put in the front of whatever factor supports a given narrative. A lot of people got turned away by overwhelmed hospital staff. A lot of people live in China. A lot of people died in India (which has poorer medical infrastructure than US). A lot of US Republicans died for not following CDC advice. A lot of covid deaths happened in short spiky bursts. One can weave a quite different narrative from those points (one that supports policies like Australia's or China's, for example)
  - cycrutchfield 5y ago
    > A lot of the excess deaths were because of the measures against COVID, such as cancer cases that went undiagnosed while they were treatable because people had to cancel their checkups, or methanol poisoning because everyone was suddenly manufacturing their own hand sanitizer, often unsafely. Such a claim simply beggars belief. Please cite some figures that back up your assertions.