The mere statement that hundreds of thousands of people will still lose their lives in and effort to keep the economy going is conjecture based on some rather faulty assumptions. There is absolutely no evidence that shutting boarders and locking down for two months saved hundreds of thousands of lives. In fact, scientists who specialize in analyzing complex data are finding some pretty solid trends from data in all countries, regardless of lock down strategies, that clearly showed Covid was not expanding at a true exponential rate. There is increasing evidence that only a fraction of the population is actually susceptible to catching Covid.mixturerich wrote: ↑Sun Jun 21, 2020 11:19 am Exactly, everyone is all of a sudden the new CDC director. Let people choose their own moral compass because at the end of the day hundreds of thousands people will still lose their lives in an effort to keep the economy going, and that naturally bothers some people more than others.
As far as this being a moral compass argument is hypocritical garbage. First, we as individuals were not allowed to chose. We had the doomsday scenario shoved down our throats. This is about teams for the most part. You clearly demonstrated that when you failed to look at any of the links I had posted. I, however, have actually spent countless hours reading both sides of the argument, and find the doomsday position to be lacking in any sort of provable, verifiable, scientific principal. The Imperial model that initially scared the crap out of everyone, (aside from being produced by an individual who has been spectacularly wrong about every prediction he has ever made) was developed on a piece of software that was 15,000 lines of code long. Now, if you believe for one second that 15,000 lines of code can accurately model the complex social behavior of a modern day society, along with a virus to which at the time nearly nothing was known about, then I really don't know what else to say.
And given your view on people dying, I hate to break it to you, but thousands of people die everyday--often from completely preventable reasons. Where is your moral outrage for those deaths. Or do you only have moral outrage for Covid deaths. How many times do people in western societies throw perfectly good food out because it is a day past the best before date, while thousands starve. Where was the moral outrage. Thousands die every year from completely preventable illness's, or for things that are treated for pennies a day. Where is the moral outrage there? In May, more people died in BC from drug overdoses than have died of Covid during the entire pandemic; one of the reasons for so many deaths was because the drugs are being mixed with more toxic substances due to the border being closed. Where is the moral outrage. How many people stand in line to get the latest iPhone, having zero regard for the conditions in which they are manufactured. Where is the moral outrage then.
So go ahead and feel all warm and cozy with your simplistic view of the world, and easy moral justification. But everyday, the data will show more and more, that the position is ill founded, and in the end caused far more social damage, and potentially death, than Covid ever would have. In fact, there is a very real threat of millions starving to death, due to the disruption in food distribution and humanitarian work. But I mean, we meant well, so I don't suppose you will feel any moral guilt for those deaths either.