Streamer, don't be too surprised, but I agree with you that sometimes the "no action alternative" is the preferred and best alternative. Whether the no action alternative to Covid would have produced the same eventual outcome, meaning no higher number of illnesses or deaths, is speculative. Personally, I'm not buying it that no action would have been just as effective or more effective. I was 72 when Covid struck, so I was a bit concerned about the potential effect on me. Certainly shooting any unvaccinated republican who got within 30' of me would have been justifiable self defense, right?
Is it being speculative?
There is little to no evidence that measures reduced illness or death and increasing evidence that in ways measures may have increased illness and death.
In addition, the impact on the economy was massive. Academic achievement fell when schools were closed. As it stands today, around 50% of students (increasingly in younger grades) are not on grade level with reading, math and science which grew considerably from pre-covid. Rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideations have all drastically increased largely due to lockdowns.
But here you go thinking for yourself “I was a bit concerned about the potential effect on me” instead of looking collectively at what is best for society. FP bringing up Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is relevant as you were primarily concerned with your own PERCEPTION of safety before the physiological and psychological needs of others. People like you were allowed to dictate the lives of others out of your own irrational fears. Instead, you should have shut up, let people live their lives and you stayed home in your safe little bubble until you felt ready to come out. If that were allowed to occur, I’m sure life would be a lot better for many people than it is currently and certainly no worse for the majority.
Streamer
Previous Topic
Index
