4 ms·

I am confused at how people are still asking questions like this, seemingly in good faith. The point of masks and vaccines and even staying home as needed, is n

I am confused at how people are still asking questions like this, seemingly in good faith. The point of masks and vaccines and even staying home as needed, is not specifically to prevent healthy 18-50 year olds from dying. It's to limit the spread to everyone else, bunging up hospital capacity, killing off old folk needlessly, and causing local governments to freak out and impose restrictions because their hospitals are at capacity. Maybe it's not good faith, I don't know at this point.

wallacoloo 5y ago
If you’re on this site, you probably work in an industry where it feels like very large things can get done in 18 months. I remember in February 2020, before anything reached the US, watching China build a new hospital in all of 10 days. I have some vague understandings of “all-hands-on-deck” govt projects of the past. FDR’s WPA jobs program, etc. So it’s dishearteningly easy to look at this situation from that point of view: “my government, and everyone currently exercising power, has had 18 months to do the dirty work of expanding health capacity, retrofitting buildings to make them safer in the presence of a virus (e.g. open-air supermarkets), and whatever else is necessary to help us all live how we’d like to during this time,” and instead they’ve not really tackled any of those things. We got the vaccine, which is a huge triumph, but beyond that it’s just “hey we need you as an individual to stay at home another couple years while we slack off and keep ignoring any opportunity for letting you live the life you did before.” I know not all real world systems are as flexible as software systems, especially true of the Frankenstein healthcare system we have here. But it really is not hard for me to say “if this were my problem, I would solve it like an engineer, by building (more capacity, tools to make it easier to grow manpower in the areas they’re needed).” And then be upset at the people who are asking me to make my own life shit for another couple years so that they can avoid making life-long improvements to the systems that need it. Because if our roles were reversed here — if I were the one at risk of this disease — I would never ask of them what they’re asking of me. It’s just not how I think about the world or how I think about solving problems. I think some people voicing GP’s comment really are doing it in good faith. People have different lived experiences that lead to radically different ways of thinking about the world and how to act within it. These disagreements will always exist. The pragmatist accepts that and says that of the range of possible solutions to your problem, the most successful is the one that can be grounded in this world where people disagree with each other and pursue their own interests.
- distrill 5y ago
  It's just unreasonable to me that we're 18 months into this, and they haven't heard the point articulated that it isn't to prevent their death specifically, but their neighbors death and the overwhelming of the healthcare system. These discussions were fine for a long time, but at this point GP et al must be ignoring these points on purpose because they don't like the answer. It's like the trivial "my body my choice right?" gotcha attempt. Does that serve any purpose other than to rile people up who are already in an echo chamber? Your phrasing of the point, "I'm frustrated with these mandates and may not agree with them for this reason" is fine. But coming at it from a place of articulated-genuine curiosity doesn't make any sense to me, today, given how long these conversations have been happening.
- human 5y ago
  Thank you for your answer. I was asking the question in good faith. Coming from an engineering and entrepreneurial background, I can't help but recognize myself in your comment. I do feel like we should have done a "war effort" to improve our healthcare system and even our public buildings. I can agree it's not an easy task, but it seems 1000 times more productive than locking people at home. Plus, it would ready us for the next epidemic or pandemic. Now, if we get hit again, we're doing lockdowns again. As for protecting myself versus protecting others, I do understand the logic. I haven't been living under a rock for the past 18 months. However, what I hear is that vaccinated people don't get very sick from Covid. If that is true, why do I need to be vaccinated as well? Aren't they already protected? Let's put this simply, my grand-mother is 84 years old and vaccinated. If I end up giving her Covid she will most-likely be fine. And even if I were vaccinated I could still catch and transmit Covid. Once all at-risk people are vaccinated, haven't we "won" the war on Covid?
  - distrill 5y ago
    I 100% agree that we should have done and should still do more to prepare for this and future pandemics. But I still wonder how you're not getting this. The vaccine greatly reduces your chances of getting sick, and getting stuck in a hospital, but it doesn't completely eliminate it. If everyone between 18-50 refused to get vaccinated, we would still see a surge in hospitalizations. Do you not understand the word "protected"? Do you think that the utility of a young person getting vaccinated is zero? Or do you think it's just too small to be worth the inconvenience? I don't know why the conversation turns into "why do I have to do this" - can't we focus instead on why you aren't willing to help your community? And again, has literally nobody addressed this in the last 18 months that you've read? I'm sure my tone is more hostile than I intend, but I'm really confused at this point.

wallacoloo 5y ago

If you’re on this site, you probably work in an industry where it feels like very large things can get done in 18 months. I remember in February 2020, before anything reached the US, watching China build a new hospital in all of 10 days. I have some vague understandings of “all-hands-on-deck” govt projects of the past. FDR’s WPA jobs program, etc. So it’s dishearteningly easy to look at this situation from that point of view: “my government, and everyone currently exercising power, has had 18 months to do the dirty work of expanding health capacity, retrofitting buildings to make them safer in the presence of a virus (e.g. open-air supermarkets), and whatever else is necessary to help us all live how we’d like to during this time,” and instead they’ve not really tackled any of those things. We got the vaccine, which is a huge triumph, but beyond that it’s just “hey we need you as an individual to stay at home another couple years while we slack off and keep ignoring any opportunity for letting you live the life you did before.” I know not all real world systems are as flexible as software systems, especially true of the Frankenstein healthcare system we have here. But it really is not hard for me to say “if this were my problem, I would solve it like an engineer, by building (more capacity, tools to make it easier to grow manpower in the areas they’re needed).” And then be upset at the people who are asking me to make my own life shit for another couple years so that they can avoid making life-long improvements to the systems that need it. Because if our roles were reversed here — if I were the one at risk of this disease — I would never ask of them what they’re asking of me. It’s just not how I think about the world or how I think about solving problems. I think some people voicing GP’s comment really are doing it in good faith. People have different lived experiences that lead to radically different ways of thinking about the world and how to act within it. These disagreements will always exist. The pragmatist accepts that and says that of the range of possible solutions to your problem, the most successful is the one that can be grounded in this world where people disagree with each other and pursue their own interests.

distrill 5y ago
It's just unreasonable to me that we're 18 months into this, and they haven't heard the point articulated that it isn't to prevent their death specifically, but their neighbors death and the overwhelming of the healthcare system. These discussions were fine for a long time, but at this point GP et al must be ignoring these points on purpose because they don't like the answer. It's like the trivial "my body my choice right?" gotcha attempt. Does that serve any purpose other than to rile people up who are already in an echo chamber? Your phrasing of the point, "I'm frustrated with these mandates and may not agree with them for this reason" is fine. But coming at it from a place of articulated-genuine curiosity doesn't make any sense to me, today, given how long these conversations have been happening.
human 5y ago
Thank you for your answer. I was asking the question in good faith. Coming from an engineering and entrepreneurial background, I can't help but recognize myself in your comment. I do feel like we should have done a "war effort" to improve our healthcare system and even our public buildings. I can agree it's not an easy task, but it seems 1000 times more productive than locking people at home. Plus, it would ready us for the next epidemic or pandemic. Now, if we get hit again, we're doing lockdowns again. As for protecting myself versus protecting others, I do understand the logic. I haven't been living under a rock for the past 18 months. However, what I hear is that vaccinated people don't get very sick from Covid. If that is true, why do I need to be vaccinated as well? Aren't they already protected? Let's put this simply, my grand-mother is 84 years old and vaccinated. If I end up giving her Covid she will most-likely be fine. And even if I were vaccinated I could still catch and transmit Covid. Once all at-risk people are vaccinated, haven't we "won" the war on Covid?
- distrill 5y ago
  I 100% agree that we should have done and should still do more to prepare for this and future pandemics. But I still wonder how you're not getting this. The vaccine greatly reduces your chances of getting sick, and getting stuck in a hospital, but it doesn't completely eliminate it. If everyone between 18-50 refused to get vaccinated, we would still see a surge in hospitalizations. Do you not understand the word "protected"? Do you think that the utility of a young person getting vaccinated is zero? Or do you think it's just too small to be worth the inconvenience? I don't know why the conversation turns into "why do I have to do this" - can't we focus instead on why you aren't willing to help your community? And again, has literally nobody addressed this in the last 18 months that you've read? I'm sure my tone is more hostile than I intend, but I'm really confused at this point.