I'm sensing a theme here in creating strawmen. My advice to you would be attempt to steelman opposing views. Attempt to find synthesis between your initial noti

I'm sensing a theme here in creating strawmen. My advice to you would be attempt to steelman opposing views. Attempt to find synthesis between your initial notions and the best parts of the opposing views. To answer you question at a high-level: Rationing based on things people have ZERO control over seems worse to me than rationing based on things people have SOME (even if a little) control over. And there of course will be a litany of hypothetical/real scenarios that we could drum up for each rationing strategy that shows people losing out (it's rationing, no matter what some people will not end up with access!). And highlighting one side of the costs doesn't immediately mean that the other side isn't more ethical.