It is going to happen no matter what we do, if the oft cited paper is correct.
dup
You’re assuming that the panic is caused mostly by the shutdown orders and that if we instead go about business as usual there will be less panic, less hoarding, and less running to the ER for no reason.
Even if you could completely suppress news about the virus, people would pretty quickly realize that something was wrong when friends and family members started dying from what they thought was a head cold, and they would panic. And that panic would be even more random and more uninformed then it is now.
You can’t prevent panic by not acting or not acting sufficiently. That makes no sense.
Sure, but people who are confident we can somehow identify and cull the least worthy in order to minimize societal damage are fooling themselves.
Has someone mentioned Asimov’s story “The Winnowing” yet The Winnowing - Wikipedia ? It’s from 1976
"In the year 2005, the world’s population of six billion is suffering from acute famine. The World Food Organization decides on desperate measures to decrease the population by a process of triage. They propose to do this by adding selective poisons to certain food shipments to grossly over-populated areas.
They attempt to blackmail biochemist Dr. Aaron Rodman into cooperating with their scheme (threatening to withhold food rations from his daughter’s family if he doesn’t comply), proposing to utilise his development of LP - a lipoprotein which when incorporated into foods will cause random deaths.
The scheme is planned but Rodman is unwilling to go along with it. At a meeting between him and senior government officials and members of the World Food Council, he provides as refreshment sandwiches laced with the LP, so that they will die at random, just as they had planned for so many others to die. He carefully matches the LP in the sandwiches (which he also eats) to his own metabolism, so that he will die quickly and not be guilty of involvement in the scheme. "
Just so you know, OP, you are not alone in your thinking.
I am old and I am afraid that the costs will be a lot higher economically than some of you are willing to see. Bear in mind what **Chronos **said in post 47; people will die from the treatment, not just from the virus. If you cut off people’s livelihoods, as has been done to many already and will only get worse, people will die of starvation, of diseases other than the virus that don’t get treated because no money no insurance, people will commit suicide (or worst case, murder) because they don’t see how to go on, etc. etc. And Chefguy (post 50), it’s not that old people are useless. It’s that we are less likely to survive and we have fewer years to enjoy that survival. Triage. We aren’t doing it, and we should be.
When our hospitals are so swamped that we’re triaging, it would be just old people who perish. It will be people of all ages.
You first. I’ve got more to do yet. Fuck that fatalist bullshit.
This, and all the similar arguments, is tantamount to saying in 1939, “fuck it, the Axis powers are on a roll and a bunch of us are going to die if we try to fight them, so let’s just hand them the keys and let them do their thing.”
There is also the potential for another pandemic (influenza or otherwise) to emerge while we are in the throes of dealing with this one, which could compound the current tragic but moderate losses with far more severe mortality. This is the argument for continuing with the current measures even if the impact on reducing this crisis to manageable proportions is insufficient. We do not need an H1N1 pandemic, or worse, polio or transmissible Ebola while all current surveillance and resources are focused on dealing with COVID-19.
Stranger
I feel bad for kayT and others who seemingly give up when things get tough, and imagine the complete collapse of civilization because people can’t contribute to the economy for a couple fucking months. I’m very glad my parents, and my parents parents, and hopefully my kids, are all made of stronger stuff.
It’s not only fatalistic, it is very cynical, stupid, and lazy. “People will be so sad to lose their jobs that they will committ suicide! What about those people! We should all be willing to risk our lives and quality of life so those noble souls won’t fling themselves off of a bridge!”
How about we keep people from flinging themselves off of a bridge by making poverty dignified? Guarantee food and shelter and (at least) mental health care so that poverty doesn’t have be the worst thing in the world. Suicide doesn’t have to be an inevitable outcome of an economic downtown. We just allow it to be because our society is a cruel one.
With the amount of undiagnosed cases considered and the relatively low numbers coming out of china I will be surprised if the death rate exceeds .1%. I think strong measures you be used in the first wave as to not overwhelm hospitals but after that sheltering should be left up to individuals. This whole thing is a politicians dream. They all get to showcase their leadership skills with inflated numbers so when lower numbers come in they look like heroes inspite of the fact the world economy is being destroyed.
There’s also the possibility of a war or messy putsch in the middle of this. Or bad earthquakes, tsunamis, wildfires, etc. Having a disaster is no protection against simultaneous disasters.
My stepmother was just hospitalized in NYC with a confirmed positive COVID-19 test and pneumonia. My 79-year-old asthmatic father was told that he still doesn’t meet the criteria to be tested because he is asymptomatic (so far, anyway). There is no question in my mind that the number of positive people is a LOT higher than the number of confirmed positives.
It’s the whole notion that some people are not as worthy of life as others that pisses me off. Remember Dredd-Scott? Negroes were thought to have only 2/3 the worth of whites. Native Americans were thought to have no value whatsoever. It’s an excuse that has been used to murder and predate on various groups of people everywhere for as long as these things have been recorded.
Here’s a thought for the OP and kayT: old people are vulnerable, but who is actually spreading the virus? That’s right, the young adults who gather in huge numbers and infect others who then go and infect the elderly (I’m painting with a huge brush here). So why not espouse the mass culling/killing. . .oops, I mean “triage”. . . of young adults (the transmitters) rather than the elderly (the victims of this callous behavior)? In fact, why don’t we just take out all those pesky children who are just walking petri dishes of infection, the filthy little buggers?
You really want to get fatalistic? The mega volcano underneath Yellowstone National Park is percolating.
The economic cost of lockdowns and distancing is large, but it’s not apocalyptic. The world GDP for 2020 was forecast to be around $90 trillion. Let’s try to put an upper bound on the cost by making some extreme assumptions - every country in the world spends six months of this year in lockdown/quarantine, and their economy shrinks by 25% during that time. So that’s about $11 trillion in lost income.
Some of that is offset by stimulus spending and some will be recouped next year, as households resume spending that was deferred.
Did I say give up? Did the OP? no. There is middle ground here. I am so goddamn tired of one extreme or the other in politics, in pandemics, in this whole country. I am done trying to communicate with people shouting from one end or the other, at each other. Can none of you read any more?
Unfortunately, for many, the “middle ground” seems to be:
“Why don’t we just let a bunch of people I don’t know die, so I can go about my regular business and not suffer financially?”
That’s not going to happen. It’s magical thinking.