The Coronavirus, not the beer

sturg33 said:
But people still die.

A lot of them

And we can avoid those deaths if we outlaw it
Click to expand...

Yeah. It's a weighing of costs and benefits. Society doesn't always get it right. Different societies will draw the line in different ways. Germany has no speed limits on their highways. Some countries put fluoride in their water. Others don't.
 
sturg33 said:
Honestly though. I know people mock this comparison. But why SHOULDNT we ban driving? Why shouldnt we ban swimming?

Why do we accept that level of risk for freedom... but we are told to self-arrest for something that frankly isn't a threat to 99.999% of the population under the age of 50.
Click to expand...

If the fatality rate of swimming or driving was 20% for a certain group of people (who may it may not individually drive/swim) then we should outlaw both.
 
The Chosen One said:
That is a terrible justification to say we shouldn't do anything to find a balance to mitigate deaths.
Click to expand...

But I dont think we shouldnt do anything.

I think old people and immunocompromised people should shelter in place.

I think the rest of us should be aware of our risks.

And I think we should live our lives.

Instead, "protests are not an essential activity "
 
Quite poetic that the survivors of the "War to End All Wars" are willingly put on the sacrifice block by the generations for whom they were told they were fighting for.
 
sturg33 said:
Then you dont believe in freedom.
Click to expand...

Freedom is relative, bro. I believe in freedom in so much as the negative externalities of your action don't impede my personal freedom.

And my god, this is the libertarianest take of them all. Even in your hypothetical, its the equivalent of saying "I have the freedom to fire my gun in any direction I want".
 
While you admit to your life being much more convenient, you endorse the government shutting us down while 20 million people have thus far lost their jobs. The long term consequences are incalculable... the suicide, the abuse, the addiction, the poverty, the debt...

But you get to feel righteous about it. Glad for you!
 
sturg33 said:
This is such a ridiculous representation that I thought you were above.

Oh well
Click to expand...

You're a smart guy sturg. One of my favorite posters to read and a great critical thinker.

But this is absolutely how you come across when stating "this isn't a threat to people under 50". While technically true, its remarkably unsympathetic and truly missing the point to why people support "shelter in place". We are doing this to protect those at risk groups that have no way to protect themselves if the rest of us move around at our leisure.
 
sturg33 said:
While you admit to your life being much more convenient, you endorse the government shutting us down while 20 million people have thus far lost their jobs. The long term consequences are incalculable... the suicide, the abuse, the addiction, the poverty, the debt...

But you get to feel righteous about it. Glad for you!
Click to expand...
Absolutely true. As someone luckily not impacted, I don't have the ability to offer a non "convenient" perspective. But that doesn't disqualify me from offering bad opinions on a baseball message board, or challenging you on your opinions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top