The strategy of favouring the old and the vulnerable will prove disastrous long term.

TheCitizen

Downlinz wrote: »

It definitely seems like a late stage capitalism thing if we're even debating the monetary value of lives and discussing the merit of sacrifices of the few to maintain the comfort of the majority.

Western society could honestly do with a reset at this stage, this pandemic has laid bare the skewed priorities and obsessive greed of so many.

It also lays bare the stupidity of that cohort. There'll be no positive economic impact accruing from diverting from the current medically and scientifically advised strategy.

ITman88

TheCitizen wrote: »

Think about ITman, it's the economy stupid and the economy will be decimated if we DON'T adhere to the current strategy, to put it in terms that you're hell bent on blathering on about. Have you got that? Is the penny dropping?

The penny is dropping my good man.
It dropped months ago and I assure it will drop for you yet.
Just because someone doesn’t agree with your incredibly selfish and narrow minded view they ain’t blathering on.
Unfortunately some have to consider the economic effects, your lucky to be so privileged

RandomViewer

Maxpfizer wrote: »

To be fair, the OP is talking about long term and specifically mentions that.

So if your parents are in the vulnerable age range then long term they aren't going to always be around.

Similarly people with underlying conditions who are at risk now will also be at risk in the long term if being poor is the long term consequence.

Poor people tend to do worse in terms of access to healthcare and life expectancy etc.

So there would be a trade off there in that being poor in the future would also be a risk factor. Though presumably not nearly as high as rolling the dice with COVID-19.

Smelling a bit of " Final Solution" about you,

RandomViewer

I don't get this economy sh1te,with the exception of the late 90s ,early 00's Ireland hasn't really had an economy so I don't get this fuss about it.
If people want to put money before people's lives they'd better be prepared for The consequences,.Karma is a bitch

ITman88

RandomViewer wrote: »

I don't get this economy sh1te,with the exception of the late 90s ,early ops Ireland hasn't really had an economy so I don't get this fuss about it.

What

trapp

This is not just about the effects of the economy.

Expecting young people to not see or interact in person with anyone outside of their own family group for months on end?
That is absolute ****ing madness and will not last.

Social Distancing and Self Isolation are horrible, horrible things. The are needed for now but the very idea of living our lives without getting within 2 metres of anyone is so so sad to think about.

We are a social species, we do not exist to be isolated on our own all the time and people will not accept this. It's not the economy stupid, it's the basic human need to interact in person with others.

All the other crisis in history, terrorist attacks, wars etc were overcome through the human spirit and people coming together. Eventually we'll reach the stage where people have to come together in person, friends, partners, grandchildren, boyfriends, girlfriends, teenage crushes, whatever, eventually these people will come back together because society won't function indefinitely on our own.

Humans can't function and won't function isolated to our homes indefinitely. It simply won't last.

I would suggest that many boards posters don't appreciate that as perhaps many are not social people and spend much of their time online and on forums and so on.

The news today says 90 million worldwide are confined to their homes.

Anyone who thinks this will or should last is off their heads.

Donald Trump

trapp wrote: »

This is not just about the effects of the economy.

Expecting young people to not see or interact in person with anyone outside of their own family group for months on end?
That is absolute ****ing madness and will not last.

Social Distancing and Self Isolation are horrible, horrible things. The are needed for now but the very idea of living our lives without getting within 2 metres of anyone is so so sad to think about.

We are a social species, we do not exist to be isolated on our own all the time and people will not accept this. It's not the economy stupid, it's the basic human need to interact in person with others.

All the other crisis in history, terrorist attacks, wars etc were overcome through the human spirit and people coming together. Eventually we'll reach the stage where people have to come together in person, friends, partners, grandchildren, boyfriends, girlfriends, teenage crushes, whatever, eventually these people will come back together because society won't function indefinitely on our own.

Humans can't function and won't function isolated to our homes indefinitely. It simply won't last.

I would suggest that many boards posters don't appreciate that as perhaps many are not social people and spend much of their time online and on forums and so on.

The news today says 90 million worldwide are confined to their homes.

Anyone who thinks this will or should last is off their heads.

What would you prefer between the twp options below?
A) go out and do your business. See the grandkids, get the virus and die in 2 months
not see them close up for 6 months but be there with them for the next 20 years.

For some people, that dichotomy is real. If you are young and healthy then it is probably not you. But it is for others.

ITman88

Donald Trump wrote: »

What would you prefer between the twp options below?
A) go out and do your business. See the grandkids, get the virus and die in 2 months
not see them close up for 6 months but be there with them for the next 20 years.

For some people, that dichotomy is real. If you are young and healthy then it is probably not you. But it is for others.

Alternatively
A) Go out, go to work, feed your kids, pay your bills. Isolate when home and do not visit any elderly or vulnerable for 6 months
Don’t go to work, don’t visit any elderly for 6 months. Those elderly will be alive for an amount of time that can’t be predicted

That dichotomy is real for most working class I’m afraid

trapp

Donald Trump wrote: »

What would you prefer between the twp options below?
A) go out and do your business. See the grandkids, get the virus and die in 2 months
not see them close up for 6 months but be there with them for the next 20 years.

For some people, that dichotomy is real. If you are young and healthy then it is probably not you. But it is for others.

This is it, if it was for a definite timeframe, 3 months, 6 months whatever it may well happen.

It won't last because it's indefinite at the moment.

I would also say that the idea of waiting it out is much more appealing to someone in their 80s than a young person starting out in life at 20 years old.

Even for kids. Are we suggesting we confine kids, teenagers to their own family group, with no school or social outlets indefinitely. That is ****ing crazy.

Downlinz

trapp wrote: »

This is not just about the effects of the economy.

Expecting young people to not see or interact in person with anyone outside of their own family group for months on end?
That is absolute ****ing madness and will not last.

Social Distancing and Self Isolation are horrible, horrible things. The are needed for now but the very idea of living our lives without getting within 2 metres of anyone is so so sad to think about.

We are a social species, we do not exist to be isolated on our own all the time and people will not accept this. It's not the economy stupid, it's the basic human need to interact in person with others.

All the other crisis in history, terrorist attacks, wars etc were overcome through the human spirit and people coming together. Eventually we'll reach the stage where people have to come together in person, friends, partners, grandchildren, boyfriends, girlfriends, teenage crushes, whatever, eventually these people will come back together because society won't function indefinitely on our own.

Humans can't function and won't function isolated to our homes indefinitely. It simply won't last.

I would suggest that many boards posters don't appreciate that as perhaps many are not social people and spend much of their time online and on forums and so on.

The news today says 90 million worldwide are confined to their homes.

Anyone who thinks this will or should last is off their heads.

This seems like the denial stage of grief. There's no logic or reason to what you're proposing, you simply don't like the necessary measures and believe they'll go away because others will feel as uncomfortable as you following them for any significant period of time.

I believe when the bodies are piling up that there won't be too many feeling so agitated about staying at home, they'll be grateful to still to be healthy and have a future to look forward to.

RandomViewer

RandomViewer wrote: »

I don't get this economy sh1te,with the exception of the late 90s ,early 00's Ireland hasn't really had an economy so I don't get this fuss about it.
If people want to put money before people's lives they'd better be prepared for The consequences,.Karma is a bitch

People are insanely greedy since the Celtic Tiger and expect that to be fulfilled no matter what.

Downlinz

trapp wrote: »

This is it, if it was for a definite timeframe, 3 months, 6 months whatever it may well happen.

It won't last because it's indefinite at the moment.

I would also say that the idea of waiting it out is much more appealing to someone in their 80s than a young person starting out in life at 20 years old.

Even for kids. Are we suggesting we confine kids, teenagers to their own family group, with no school or social outlets indefinitely. That is ****ing crazy.

Kids, teenagers and young adults are literally interacting with everyone every moment of the day through social media, online gaming, discord etc..
It's the folks (men especially) in their 40s and 50s who seem to be having a real hard time dealing with this from my experience.

Donald Trump

trapp wrote: »

This is it, if it was for a definite timeframe, 3 months, 6 months whatever it may well happen.

It won't last because it's indefinite at the moment.

I would also say that the idea of waiting it out is much more appealing to someone in their 80s than a young person starting out in life at 20 years old.

Even for kids. Are we suggesting we confine kids, teenagers to their own family group, with no school or social outlets indefinitely. That is ****ing crazy.

Both life and death persist for indefinite timeframes too.

If ya wanna be a hero, volunteer for some 18 hour shifts at a hotel. Then see how happy you are if you see that people are going around recklessly spreading it.

Nermal

Donald Trump wrote: »

For some people, that dichotomy is real. If you are young and healthy then it is probably not you. But it is for others.

Those are the people who need to self-isolate, not healthy people under 50. If they can’t, they need to be given assistance to do so.

ITman88

trapp wrote: »

This is it, if it was for a definite timeframe, 3 months, 6 months whatever it may well happen.

It won't last because it's indefinite at the moment.

I would also say that the idea of waiting it out is much more appealing to someone in their 80s than a young person starting out in life at 20 years old.

Even for kids. Are we suggesting we confine kids, teenagers to their own family group, with no school or social outlets indefinitely. That is ****ing crazy.

Exactly. If we knew 6 months was required after which the virus would not have any further effect the whole world would isolate and plan accordingly.
The economic effects could be negated swiftly using accurate timeframes and effective procedures.

The issue is nobody has a clue what is required to have any effect. All we know is we are flattening the curve at present to avoid overcrowding in hospital.

If this virus is around for years, as the doctor on AMA alluded to, then there is no answer, but social distancing won’t continue for years

trapp

Downlinz wrote: »

This seems like the denial stage of grief. There's no logic or reason to what you're proposing, you simply don't like the necessary measures and believe they'll go away because others will feel as uncomfortable as you following them for any significant period of time.

I believe when the bodies are piling up that there won't be too many feeling so agitated about staying at home, they'll be grateful to still to be healthy and have a future to look forward to.

There's no denial here.

I can promise you 90 million people will not stay confined to their homes indefinitely.

These measures are introduced now and will work for a time but to live our lives like this forever?

It's never been done before and never will happen.

The human need for friendship, companionship, to have relationships will ensure that.

trapp

ITman88 wrote: »

Exactly. If we knew 6 months was required after which the virus would not have any further effect the whole world would isolate and plan accordingly.
The economic effects could be negated swiftly using accurate timeframes and effective procedures.

The issue is nobody has a clue what is required to have any effect. All we know is we are flattening the curve at present to avoid overcrowding in hospital.

If this virus is around for years, as the doctor on AMA alluded to, then there is no answer, but social distancing won’t continue for years

Even at our most basic to reproduce as a species, social distancing isn't an option.

I think some form of social distancing will be needed until a vaccine or treatment but the idea that people will just say housebound for an indefinite prolonged period of time is lunacy of the highest order.

The need for friendship and relationships will overcome the fear of death. It's the way it's always been and always will be.

Downlinz

trapp wrote: »

There's no denial here.

I can promise you 90 million people will not stay confined to their homes indefinitely.

It's not indefinite, it's until the health service can cope with the numbers infected and we don't suffer avoidable loss of life. We have a good estimate of this from China at 3 months.

If you act against that then I'd consider what you're saying as a threat to us all and certainly not in the human spirit of friendship and companionship.

Donald Trump

Nermal wrote: »

Those are the people who need to self-isolate, not healthy people under 50. If they can’t, they need to be given assistance to do so.

Well look. If you don't want to prioritize the vulnerable, then perhaps you would be ok with access to ventilators should be randomized as well rather than prioritized?

So if you catch it and get a bad dose and go to the hospital, and so does 90 year old Mick from down the road, and there is only one ventilator, he should have the same right to it as you.

The reason that not so many young people are dying is skewed by the fact that they are getting preferential access to equipment.

Similarly, if you are brought to hospital with a burst appendicitis later on tonight, you should be placed strictly at the back of the queue. And left there until the elderly corona patients are seen to properly. Even though their chances of survival might be a lot lot less than yours would be if you were seen to immediately.

Donald Trump

trapp wrote: »

Even at our most basic to reproduce as a species, social distancing isn't an option.

I think some form of social distancing will be needed until a vaccine or treatment but the idea that people will just say housebound for an indefinite prolonged period of time is lunacy of the highest order.

The need for friendship and relationships will overcome the fear of death. It's the way it's always been and always will be.

Well sure look, there is always good competition for Darwin Awards.

sheep26

Old people are more at risk of dying and have lesser chance in surviving than younger people. I think it is fair to prioritize them. If two people came into the hospital at the same time, the one who is more critical usually gets medical attention first, right? I think this should also be true and should be applied to the current situation.

Xertz

There’s no question of living life like this forever. It’s a temporary situation to try and cope with a major problem that we can’t cope with if it all comes at once.

We will have some scientific solution to this in the next few months. The entire planet’s R&D ability is focused on it right now and unlimited resources are being put into those efforts.

Also all the stops have been or are being pulled out.

We will get there and much more rapidly than in normal circumstances. Even some of the normal safety red tape is probably being cast aside. People are volunteering to try untested vaccines and all sorts of things that would normally be quite rare.

We’ll get there.

The idea that social distancing is a long term solution is not reasonable. That’s not what anyone has ever suggested. This is a stop gap. It’s sand bags against the dam until we can solve it.

At least this has happened in an era when we have a good understanding of microbiology, viruses, biotechnology and all of those things.

If this had happened even a few decades ago, we would have been in far worse circumstances.

trapp

Downlinz wrote: »

It's not indefinite, it's until the health service can cope with the numbers infected and we don't suffer avoidable loss of life. We have a good estimate of this from China at 3 months.

If you act against that then I'd consider what you're saying as a threat to us all and certainly not in the human spirit of friendship and companionship.

Not at all, you're misunderstanding.

I think, hard as it will be, it can be done over a limited timeframe like you suggest.

I'm saying it won't last under an indefinite timeframe, meaning into the summer and beyond with no end in sight.

And it won't be because people are deliberately wanting to put others at risk. It's because that need for personal relationships and human contact is inate in all of us. Eventually the need for companionship or even at a basic level the need for intimacy will overcome the fear of death.

I would have considered myself very mentally strong before this but as someone without a good family structure and work gone for now, I'm finding the isolation and loneliness very very hard.

I know I won't last months on end like this and there must be other like me.

Cilldara_2000

Xertz wrote: »

There’s no question of living life like this forever. It’s a temporary situation to try and cope with a major problem that we can’t cope with if it all comes at once.

We will have some scientific solution to this in the next few months. The entire planet’s R&D ability is focused on it right now and unlimited resources are being put into those efforts.

Also all the stops have been or are being pulled out.

We will get there and much more rapidly than in normal circumstances. Even some of the normal safety red tape is probably being cast aside. People are volunteering to try untested vaccines and all sorts of things that would normally be quite rare.

We’ll get there.

Down with this sort of thing. I want to assume the worst that the economy will be banjaxed for ever more, and continue to make wild guesses based on a severe misunderstanding of economics, the mechanics of a multinational currency union and how it's stronger that the sum of its parts, while also comparing the upcoming depression with every other recession the country has experienced despite its cause being unique.

ITman88

Downlinz wrote: »

It's not indefinite, it's until the health service can cope with the numbers infected and we don't suffer avoidable loss of life. We have a good estimate of this from China at 3 months.

If you act against that then I'd consider what you're saying as a threat to us all and certainly not in the human spirit of friendship and companionship.

But how is it guaranteed China wont get a surge in cases when the lockdown is lifted??

sea swimmer

I read Mathew Paris' article a few days ago. The ultimate logic is that society cannot stop all work and reproduction indefinitly to preserve the frail elderly.
I lifted a box of photos while clearing a spare bedroom to sleep in and I thought... I have had a good life. Mid sixties and not frail but if I get left behind in the great Innuit seal hunt of life, aged maybe 80 yrs old, with a blanket in the snow, then.. so be it. Maybe, after 75 yrs I shall stop having a flu jab.
Hit me with your rhythm stick.

trapp

Xertz wrote: »

There’s no question of living life like this forever. It’s a temporary situation to try and cope with a major problem that we can’t cope with if it all comes at once.

We will have some scientific solution to this in the next few months. The entire planet’s R&D ability is focused on it right now and unlimited resources are being put into those efforts.

Also all the stops have been or are being pulled out.

We will get there and much more rapidly than in normal circumstances. Even some of the normal safety red tape is probably being cast aside. People are volunteering to try untested vaccines and all sorts of things that would normally be quite rare.

We’ll get there.

The idea that social distancing is a long term solution is not reasonable. That’s not what anyone has ever suggested. This is a stop gap. It’s sand bags against the dam until we can solve it.

At least this has happened in an era when we have a good understanding of microbiology, viruses, biotechnology and all of those things.

If this had happened even a few decades ago, we would have been in far worse circumstances.

Exactly.

Xertz

ITman88 wrote: »

But how is it guaranteed China wont get a surge in cases when the lockdown is lifted??

It’s not and that’s why the solution is going to be technical, not social.

This is absolutely a stopgap measure to buy time.

FVP3

ITman88 wrote: »

Exactly. If we knew 6 months was required after which the virus would not have any further effect the whole world would isolate and plan accordingly.
The economic effects could be negated swiftly using accurate timeframes and effective procedures.

The issue is nobody has a clue what is required to have any effect. All we know is we are flattening the curve at present to avoid overcrowding in hospital.

If this virus is around for years, as the doctor on AMA alluded to, then there is no answer, but social distancing won’t continue for years

Yes there is no exit strategy from social distancing on its own.

Were I to suggest one it would be that we try and flatten the curve now, by any means necessary, and once we get some control over that we need to allow non vulnerable, immune, and younger people back to work. This is similar to what Korea did, and to do it we need to ramp up testing to pretty much everybody. This does mean technology needs to improve.

I am fairly sure that any vaccine for this will be ready to go faster than the 18 months normally claimed. Thats for normal situations.

ITman88

Xertz wrote: »

It’s not and that’s why the solution is going to be technical, not social.

This is absolutely a stopgap measure to buy time.

What’s the technical solution?

Yeah it can only be a stopgap