3 ms·

I actually think children are much better off with what you call "long-term damage", this generation will now be way more likely to be ready for the next pandem

I actually think children are much better off with what you call "long-term damage", this generation will now be way more likely to be ready for the next pandemic which is _not_ a question of if but _when_, with this first-hand experience hopefully they will avoid many of those failures you complain about (when many of the reach political positions in their adulthood); and is not like they are getting anywhere near serious long-term damage like during the black plague when most children saw half of their family die and there was no internet, or electricity or any of the niceties they now enjoy.

rglullis 5y ago
You are kidding, right? Granted, a very cynical view of the educational system is most Western countries is that it is a glorified time-waster for kids to be busy while parents work. But even that was lost during the pandemic. Most schools basically have given up on getting students to learn anything this past year. Lockdowns have acted as prolonged stunt on children's socialization opportunities. Anxiety levels for teenagers are through the roof. The effects of these two years on younger kids will be profound and long-lasting. They are paying a lot more than their share of risk. And saying "they are not dying" is not a consolation because - unlike with the Plague - kids are basically zero-risk compared with other age groups. > At least they had internet and other niceties Are you serious? The last thing you should want for kids is for them to become dependent on something like the Internet. Such a comment is almost offensive to a parent that does not want to see their kids turning into mindless, socially-inept drones like the average HN-commenter.