Quote:
Originally Posted by Heyitsrick
He's not talking about sacrificing lives. He's talking about having a quite necessary balance between inherent risks and national economic health and well being. How that's lost on people is quite curious.
What are people going to say when the "curve" has been flattened and state governors want to reopen their states? A flattened curve doesn't mean there aren't new cases of infection. The risks of infection will still be out there. Flattening the curve simply means trying to get to a point where the healthcare systems can cater to the numbers of sick while not being overwhelmed by sharp spikes. Should we shut down everything until there are NO new cases of infection? Or, are you willing to assume some risks?
We've already gotten an indication of how people will react - and that's even when there weren't natural supply shortages. Hoarding and panic prevailed. Imagine "life" in a scenario where the national economy has been decimated. Good luck with law and order. Good luck with liberties. Good luck with supply chains. Good luck with food and medical needs. Good luck with everyday safety.
Living life entails everyday risks. While it's laudable that we collectively want to protect everyone (and honestly, that means ourselves), we can never remove all risk while not also suffering other serious consequences. Finding the balance isn't easy, but it's an imperative.
|
No, he said Sacrifice himself for society. Doesn’t “Sacrifice “ mean give himself up. I never said sacrifice myself, he said give himself up , I didn’t say what you said I did. Sorry for the misunderstanding, but don’t change my words around!