Corona virus

just everyone keep in mind that other illnesses still exist. not every cough and fever is coronavirus.

and no, not every single person in the world is going to get coronavirus, and not every single person that gets it will die.

the amount of doomsdaying throughout the media, officials and especially on these forums is insane. the induced panic will end up killing more people that covid-41 mark my words

"

LennyLen wrote:

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

And some of the views in here are perfectly okay with me dying.

What they're talking about is essentially the trolley problem. Is it better to sacrifice a smaller amount of people so that a larger number of people survive in total?

Just because you choose to kill the smaller number doesn't mean you're happy with the solution.

Only the people in the trolley have the luxury of calling it a trolley problem.

Also I find that a gross simplification but I know you mean well. Anyway its a fair response academically but I cant find solace in it.

Its going to be a long year.

"

xMustard wrote:

especially on these forums is insane. the induced panic will end up killing more people that covid-41 mark my words

I'm not sure about that. But I WILL predict that hundreds of thousands will die to totalitarian attempts to contain COVID. At least. At that point maybe, if we're very lucky, they'll stop going to such lengths to contain it.

And then after that, no matter what choice is made, millions will die. Either to COVID19, or to totalitarianism.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

"

LennyLen wrote:

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

And some of the views in here are perfectly okay with me dying.

What they're talking about is essentially the trolley problem. Is it better to sacrifice a smaller amount of people so that a larger number of people survive in total?

Just because you choose to kill the smaller number doesn't mean you're happy with the solution.

Only the people in the trolley have the luxury of calling it a trolley problem.

Also I find that a gross simplification but I know you mean well. Anyway its a fair response academically but I cant find solace in it.

You can't now. You will eventually. What I'm warning of isn't real to you. Yet.

Quarantaining myself on my trekker, Nitrification has the benefit to repell humans. All i see is people going for a walk outside from village to village.

Butcherys seem to go on vacation next week, while politicians brag about food-security. Going to go yell at my lifestock to stop fucking growing breed.
Noone wants to eat obese animals.

The radio even plays the bavarian hymn, they also mentioned to want to play it till corona ends. This is torture.

Hey, atleast Haircuts are considered basic necessary services, if there are lesss than 10 people inside and 50quewued outside.
Going down with style :)

Maybe we will even get 1% to quit this circus early.


Atleast the weather is fine.

@scrotie, your leaning to hard on the totalitarian angle scrotie.

People aren't going to forget their liberty in a few months of social distancing or lockdown scenario's, they will take it currently under the "crisis" scenario and when its over that will be that.

For example, when covid hits china again it will become apparent that china didn't achieve herd-immunity with its totalitarian methods of isolation and they will probably have a second wave of the virus.
That should easily silence the current "praise china" and "look what an authoritarian regime can achieve" sentiments.

As for the economical angle, i assume most policies will resolve around keeping it churning at a low pace keeping the essentials going and making sure everything that needs to get done to keep society as is going.

We are already seeing a massive shift to employing technologie to homework to keep those jobs going, with those people at home the danger of people that actually need to move about also goes down because more space is available limiting contagion.

If people keep at these methods then we achieve two things.

1) herd immunity is achieved simply at a slower pace
2) because of 1 the health system isn't overburdened by a peak which results in the least fatalities

All that we are doing is slowing down the pace of the contagion, we aren't "stopping" it.
And the only reason we are doing that is to make sure our health system can cope with the strain on its infrastructure and people.

Actually "stopping" the contagion would be stupid because it would simply mean we are in the same scenario again next year when it visits us again, keeping us in a perpetual state of anxiety.

People are going to die so the current strategies are around making sure only 0.75% of the public dies rather then letting it run rampant and having additional casualty's because of lack of medical assistance.

Peace,

-Boem-

Regarding the herd immunity strategy that the UK in particular is leaning on, this video makes for a pretty decent breakdown of how it's meant to work and what the assumptions are - https://youtu.be/OQg2XLdpPEo

Tbh, I seriously doubt they'll even have the political capital to push it through, never mind if it could even actually work or not.

"

The_Impeacher wrote:

Even the orange guy is being ignored now.

You still need the orange guy to sign off on stuff. Ditto for other world leaders. We don't live in a technocracy. Politicians aren't obsolete.

To The Reporter: the only reason GGG keeps this thread open is because it has so, largely, refrained from getting political. I do realize you cannot control yourself, but please take it elsewhere. Some people here would like to discuss this. You will get this thread locked like all the others.

Asking nicely.