By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
haxxiy on 28 March 2020
Edit Thread
John2290 said:
Snoopy said:

You don't understand the fundamental issue, we are going to have a lot more deaths than the coronavirus if the economy goes under. Im saving people, while you try to sabotage everyone's life.

And if you let the virus run rampant or even fail to contain it within a certain margin the health system goes -> essential workforce dies -> essential services suddenly drop -> Economy crashes -> Civil unrest -> Billions die in the course of a year. The problem is two sided, we are on one side right now and I know the otherside well enough to see the danger. Fact is the moment the virus got out of control we started walking a tightrope of survival and we have a certain amount of time to cross before we get fatigued, there is no speeding things up and we can't go back the other way. We either balance across or well fall. Your suggestion that society lets the virus have it's way just gets us destroyed faster, a global depression is preferable over instant collapse and we can only hope that that is the worst of it. We are at natures mercy wheter you accept that or not it doesn't change the rwality of it. 

Calm down dude. It's an epidemic of pneumonia for the unlucky few, not the goddamn Black Death. On all likehood, no business is losing more than 1% of its workforce, and even if every worker would get sick at once, most would be back within 7 - 10 days.

Back in 1918, economic effects were negligible in most places and it took literally a third of all adults dying in the worst affected place of all we know - Samoa - to cause a minor famine the next year (since it was a rural, manual subsistence economy), and that was it in the end.

If you are that worried, why don't you go and catch the virus on purpose? To do your part and face the 0.2% death rate in your age group to be able to go back to normality certainly sounds preferable than the risk of "billions dying" you envision.