the morality of opening up ...

[oxmixmudd]

I saw this article:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/23/us/re...ism/index.html

It discusses utilitarianism and the immorality of allowing a minority to die to allow the majority to prosper.

But that argument sort of ignores a certain elephant in the room.

Utilitarianism vanishes when the cost gets too high. If the economy collapses and we lose not merely wealth but necessity (e.g. not enough food, energy collapse due to cascading logistics collapse) then the argument actually become not wealth vs life, but life vs life.

It concerns me a bit that the arguments about reopening up I'm seeing the most often do not frame this third element: That economic collapse can also claim lives, and in one of the most unpleasant ways there is - starvation. So its not just a simplistic black/white good/bad sort of a situation.

So while I support the social distancing and the willingness to lose a certain amount of wealth to save lives, it is naive to say that has no boundary, and it is important to be very much aware of the fact that once enough wealth has been lost it is not longer merely about luxury and comfort, but survival. And that is a state we need to avoid in this. And unfortunately that state is reached all too quickly in the 3rd world.So It's not a black and white, wealth and luxury vs. lives, and if not handled wisely it can easily become lives vs lives.

[Sparko]

Why not do both? Open up the country, in steps, while protecting the most vulnerable? I, being one of those, am for the country getting back to some semblance of normalcy. At the same time, I will petition my company to allow me to continue to work at home, and take all of the precautions I am currently taking, wearing a mask if I go out, picking up my groceries or having them delivered, then washing them all down before bringing them into the house, and so on.

If we open up the country just like it was before, we will have a second wave, worse than the first. But if we don't open some things back up, our economy will collapse. And suicides are already on the rise.

[Mountain Man]

It's plainly obvious now that a nationwide shutdown was an overaction and a big mistake. Many of us suspected as much from the beginning. We should "open up" as much of the country as we possibly can, taking precautions to protect the most vulnerable (and we know precisely who they are) while allowing the rest of us to get back to work. Frankly, this is how we should have handled it from day one.

[mikewhitney]

It is scary. It sounds like this virus scare has made oxmixmudd sound logical for once.

[oxmixmudd]

It's plainly obvious now that a nationwide shutdown was an overaction and a big mistake. Many of us suspected as much from the beginning. We should "open up" as much of the country as we possibly can, taking precautions to protect the most vulnerable (and we know precisely who they are) while allowing the rest of us to get back to work. Frankly, this is how we should have handled it from day one.

No - it was not. And whoever is telling you that is an idiot. We were doubling the cases every 3 to 4 days when we shut down. and had 100,000 cases or so. Deaths were rising even faster. 1 week and it would have been 400,000, two weeks 1.6 million. 3 weeks nearly 7 million. Right now we are still under a million 3 1/2 weeks out- about 1/10th where we were headed. And we are turning the corner, we have not been on unrestrained exponential growth for some time. We would have nearly 10x the dead we do now if we had not shut down at the rate this thing was spreading when the most astute governors issued shelter in place orders.

"Many of us suspected from the beginning". What idiocy. We took action and ignored our failed leadership in washington, THAT is why we haven't blown up. Not because ignorant people like you 'knew all along".

But we do need to - as soon as we can - get all the infrastructure in place to begin opening things up. Every effort needs to be on getting millions of quick turn around tests available so that critical workers and businesses can operate safely with the knowledge the people there do NOT have the virus. We need the manpower to trace and enforce quarantine of those infected. We need supplies to care for those critical that will still be coming into our hospitals, and we need plans and $$ to support our elderly care centers so that the most vulnerable are not sitting ducks. It needs to be all hands on deck, forget your petty politics, lets get this done based on objective, real criteria.

And we need to continue to, as much as possible, reduce physical contact between random members of society so that unrestrained exponential spread does not return and force another shutdown.

[Mountain Man]

No - it was not. And whoever telling you that is an idiot. We were doubling the cases every 3 to 4 days when we shut down. and had 100,000 cases or so. Deaths were rising even faster. 1 week and it would have been 400,000, two weeks 1.6 million. 3 weeks nearly 7 million. Right now we are still under a million 3 1/2 weeks out- about 1/10th where we were headed. And we are turning the corner, we have not been on unrestrained exponential growth for some time. We would have nearly 10x the dead we do now if we had not shut down at the rate this thing was spreading when the most astute governors issued shelter in place orders.

"Many of us suspected from the beginning". What idiocy. We took action and ignored our failed leadership in washington, THAT is why we haven't blown up. Not because ignorant people like you 'knew all along".

Reading comprehension fail. I never said we should have taken no action, dumbass, but destroying our economy and completely disrupting normal life across the board was not necessary. Every model and projection has been proven wildly wrong with estimates far, far higher than we saw in reality (yes, including those models that took current mitigation efforts into account). That much is as plain as the nose on your face, and I don't know why people like you are so loathe to admit it -- if it would help, you could blame Trump for doing too much.

[shunyadragon]

I saw this article:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/23/us/re...ism/index.html

It discusses utilitarianism and the immorality of allowing a minority to die to allow the majority to prosper.

But that argument sort of ignores a certain elephant in the room.

Utilitarianism vanishes when the cost gets too high. If the economy collapses and we lose not merely wealth but necessity (e.g. not enough food, energy collapse due to cascading logistics collapse) then the argument actually become not wealth vs life, but life vs life.

It concerns me a bit that the arguments about reopening up I'm seeing the most often do not frame this third element: That economic collapse can also claim lives, and in one of the most unpleasant ways there is - starvation. So its not just a simplistic black/white good/bad sort of a situation.

So while I support the social distancing and the willingness to lose a certain amount of wealth to save lives, it is naive to say that has no boundary, and it is important to be very much aware of the fact that once enough wealth has been lost it is not longer merely about luxury and comfort, but survival. And that is a state we need to avoid in this. And unfortunately that state is reached all too quickly in the 3rd world.So It's not a black and white, wealth and luxury vs. lives, and if not handled wisely it can easily become lives vs lives.

. . . the immorality of allowing the minority, poor, elderly and vulnerable die to allow the majority to prosper.

[Starlight]

. . . the immorality of allowing the minority, poor, elderly and vulnerable die to allow the majority to prosper.

The actual death panels.

[shunyadragon]

The actual death panels.

. . . economic triage, or eugenics?

[NorrinRadd]

I have multiple risk factors -- HBP, high BMI, take ACE inhibitor, near age 60, maybe one or two others -- and I favor shutting down the shutdown and letting things take their course. Weed out the weak and let the rest move on.

[simplicio]

I have multiple risk factors -- HBP, high BMI, take ACE inhibitor, near age 60, maybe one or two others -- and I favor shutting down the shutdown and letting things take their course.

Weed out the weak and let the rest move on.

Usually Christians condemn that line of reasoning.

[Starlight]

Usually Christians condemn that line of reasoning.

This is Tweb. Real Christians need not apply.

[oxmixmudd]

I have multiple risk factors -- HBP, high BMI, take ACE inhibitor, near age 60, maybe one or two others -- and I favor shutting down the shutdown and letting things take their course. Weed out the weak and let the rest move on.

Yikes.

[shunyadragon]

I have multiple risk factors -- HBP, high BMI, take ACE inhibitor, near age 60, maybe one or two others -- and I favor shutting down the shutdown and letting things take their course. Weed out the weak and let the rest move on.

As I thought eugenics is the easy way out.

[oxmixmudd]

Reading comprehension fail. I never said we should have taken no action, dumbass, but destroying our economy and completely disrupting normal life across the board was not necessary. Every model and projection has been proven wildly wrong with estimates far, far higher than we saw in reality (yes, including those models that took current mitigation efforts into account). That much is as plain as the nose on your face, and I don't know why people like you are so loathe to admit it -- if it would help, you could blame Trump for doing too much.

Sorry MM, but the simple fact is we had to do what we have done. The only way to stop the spread was to keep people apart from on another. We were on a major crash course with millions dead. And so we had to shut down. And we still are not ready to open back up. And The president was clear about that tonight, and it is good that he understands that and that he was clear with Kemp that he did not support him opening up as much as he is.