3 ms·
Totally agree. I think we have been warned more than enough. You afraid? Stay at home and lock down. (Didn’t stay home and) got sick? Your problem if no space i
by sfe22 5y ago
Totally agree. I think we have been warned more than enough. You afraid? Stay at home and lock down. (Didn’t stay home and) got sick? Your problem if no space is available. Split hospitals 50% covid and continue the rest as usual with limited capacity. We cannot control covid anymore and this was apparent just a few months in. Stop supporting authoritarianism and get real.
- notpachet 5y ago> Split hospitals 50% covid and continue the rest as usual with limited capacity Let me know when you've accomplished this. We'll wait.
- sfe22 5y agoThe percentage was just a wild guess. Its just that some resources need to be allocated to covid and the rest should continue as usual. That could be up to free market to decide, not me or you or some almighty “leaders”.
- notpachet 5y ago> That could be up to free market to decide I honestly spent a few minutes trying to figure out how to formulate a good-faith response to this, and I couldn't. I don't even know where to begin.
- sfe22 5y agoWell it is very hard to argue against this. Do you mean to say that people should not be able to decide what is more important to them so that resources can be appropriately allocated?
- notpachet 5y ago> Well it is very hard to argue against this. That wasn't why I was struggling. I was struggling because I deem it a very heartless argument, and I don't know how to have meaningful conversations with people when they don't seem to have the good of their fellow citizens at heart. The free economy can function as both an instrument of liberation and oppression depending on your place in society. It is not a universal panacea. Living in a society requires giving up some of your personal liberties from time to time, so that other people can enjoy theirs. That doesn't mean that I condone the government stripping away everyone's personal liberties. I wish that people were individually capable of making those sorts of sacrifices without any government intervention. But that isn't the world we're living in. > Do you mean to say that people should not be able to decide what is more important to them so that resources can be appropriately allocated? I'm not saying that people shouldn't be able to decide what is more important to themselves, but rather that they can't always be trusted to respect what's important to others. Thinking that a free market economy will always result in the most equitable distribution of goods and services for everyone -- that's childish.
- sfe22 5y agoOk, so people are too stupid to decide for themselves. In that case can we trust their “chosen” leaders? You know they may be too stupid to pick a good leader too. Monarchy sound good?
- satronaut 5y agounfortunately most people on this website aren't rational, and either want to be a victim or want to be a hero, and view the current state of affairs as their chance to fill that mold.