6 ms·

It'll be interesting to see what we think of the "let's destroy the livelihoods of a huge fraction of the population for unproven benefits" strategy a lot of ar

by tazjin 5y ago

It'll be interesting to see what we think of the "let's destroy the livelihoods of a huge fraction of the population for unproven benefits" strategy a lot of areas used a decade from now.

zephyrthenoble 5y ago
What are you referencing here?
- themaninthedark 5y ago
  Lockdowns would be my guess.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- taneq 5y ago
  They're saying if we'd just "let 'er rip" from the beginning that the economic impact would have been lower and that this would have been preferable. Ignoring, of course, the fact that if we'd done so then the death toll would have been pretty horrendous and that if everyone's sick or afraid of getting sick the economy is still going to to get screwed.
kaesar14 5y ago
Agreed - lockdowns are the novel strategy being used for COVID, whereas "let er' rip" which is just protecting the most vulnerable population while minimizing disruptions for everyone else has been the status quo. We didn't shut down society for polio before the vaccine. That was an exponentially more fucked up disease.
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  Polio's deadliest year, 1952, killed 3,145 Americans. The deadliest day of the COVID pandemic beats the deadliest year of polio.
guelo 5y ago
Unemployment has pretty much recovered. Nobody is going to remember this time the way you're suggesting. The way I'm going to remember it is that when this country had a crisis, instead of us coming together it caused division vitriol and hatred
- the_doctah 5y ago
  Tons of businesses still can't hire enough staff to stay open. Maybe unemployment numbers have recovered, but many people have decided they just don't want to work anymore. Plenty of people will remember it this way. Many small businesses went bankrupt and an entire generation of kids had massive educational and social setbacks. It's absurd to even suggest that everything is back to normal and everyone is A-OK with how things worked out.
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    > Tons of businesses still can't hire enough staff to stay open. It's almost like killing a million Americans has an impact on labor availability. > an entire generation of kids had massive educational and social setbacks This is largely a guess at this point, unless you're Doctor Who, and we've zero information on how they might make up ground. It will certainly be interesting to see these results between, say, red and blue states in the US with wildly different mitigation approaches.
    - the_doctah 5y ago
      >It's almost like killing a million Americans has an impact on labor availability. How many do you think are born every year? The pandemic is 2 years old at this point.
      - ceejayoz 5y ago
        An extra million. Come on. Unemployment was already quite low pre-pandemic. https://imgur.com/a/pFvBFgg https://imgur.com/a/pFvBFgg is bound to have an impact on ability to hire folks.

by tazjin 5y ago

It'll be interesting to see what we think of the "let's destroy the livelihoods of a huge fraction of the population for unproven benefits" strategy a lot of areas used a decade from now.

zephyrthenoble 5y ago

What are you referencing here?

themaninthedark 5y ago
Lockdowns would be my guess.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
taneq 5y ago
They're saying if we'd just "let 'er rip" from the beginning that the economic impact would have been lower and that this would have been preferable. Ignoring, of course, the fact that if we'd done so then the death toll would have been pretty horrendous and that if everyone's sick or afraid of getting sick the economy is still going to to get screwed.

kaesar14 5y ago

Agreed - lockdowns are the novel strategy being used for COVID, whereas "let er' rip" which is just protecting the most vulnerable population while minimizing disruptions for everyone else has been the status quo. We didn't shut down society for polio before the vaccine. That was an exponentially more fucked up disease.

ceejayoz 5y ago
Polio's deadliest year, 1952, killed 3,145 Americans. The deadliest day of the COVID pandemic beats the deadliest year of polio.

guelo 5y ago

Unemployment has pretty much recovered. Nobody is going to remember this time the way you're suggesting. The way I'm going to remember it is that when this country had a crisis, instead of us coming together it caused division vitriol and hatred

the_doctah 5y ago
Tons of businesses still can't hire enough staff to stay open. Maybe unemployment numbers have recovered, but many people have decided they just don't want to work anymore. Plenty of people will remember it this way. Many small businesses went bankrupt and an entire generation of kids had massive educational and social setbacks. It's absurd to even suggest that everything is back to normal and everyone is A-OK with how things worked out.
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  > Tons of businesses still can't hire enough staff to stay open. It's almost like killing a million Americans has an impact on labor availability. > an entire generation of kids had massive educational and social setbacks This is largely a guess at this point, unless you're Doctor Who, and we've zero information on how they might make up ground. It will certainly be interesting to see these results between, say, red and blue states in the US with wildly different mitigation approaches.
  - the_doctah 5y ago
    >It's almost like killing a million Americans has an impact on labor availability. How many do you think are born every year? The pandemic is 2 years old at this point.
    - ceejayoz 5y ago
      An extra million. Come on. Unemployment was already quite low pre-pandemic. https://imgur.com/a/pFvBFgg https://imgur.com/a/pFvBFgg is bound to have an impact on ability to hire folks.