ADVERTISEMENT

Texas Lt Governor thinks senior citizens

would be willing to die to help save the economy. Remember how appalled they pretended to be about the make believe death panels? https://www.thedailybeast.com/texas...-willing-to-die-to-save-economy-for-grandkids

Aside from your dismissive snarkiness, it is an ethical dilemma. Utilitarianism looks to bring the greatest good to the most. Is the possible destruction of our economy and the world's worth the 2% who may or may not recover?

Understand, I am not advocating that nor do I think he is. But he states HIS choice, as one being in the most vulnerable group, would be to let the world move on and he would takes his chances. I bet many of the greatest generation or boomer generation would choose the same as him. But I may be wrong.

As for death panels, we are seeing that played out in Italy now and possibly in the US as to who gets the care.

The comparison you make is off when you compare who is making the life or death decision.
 
My in-laws in their mid 70s told us this a few days ago. Obviously they are worried about it for themselves... but were a lot more worried about the world shutting down, and the repercussions from that.

This situation is pardon the pun, novel, for Americans for 2-3 weeks. After that, it isn't going to hold.
 
Aside from your dismissive snarkiness, it is an ethical dilemma. Utilitarianism looks to bring the greatest good to the most. Is the possible destruction of our economy and the world's worth the 2% who may or may not recover?

Understand, I am not advocating that nor do I think he is. But he states HIS choice, as one being in the most vulnerable group, would be to let the world move on and he would takes his chances. I bet many of the greatest generation or boomer generation would choose the same as him. But I may be wrong.

As for death panels, we are seeing that played out in Italy now and possibly in the US as to who gets the care.

The comparison you make is off when you compare who is making the life or death decision.
Policy makers aren't just making decisions for themselves, however. They are making them for all of us.

Utilitarian thought requires that we maximize overall happiness, not wealth. We may very well be faced with the choice between two outcomes that both decrease happiness - a loss of wealth vs. a loss of loved ones in high risk groups - and have to make that tough decision.

Personally, when I look at the high-risk people I care about, I'd rather we do all we can to protect them, even if I personally suffer great economic hardship as a result. When it comes to what personally brings happiness to me, I put a great premium on life. Wealth means little in comparison.

That said, wealth isn't irrelevant. Studies do show that, much as it might disgust us, wealth does, in fact, help make us happy. Economic stability and the lower stress that accompanies it do, in fact, help make us happy. So I'm not saying my answer to this question is the only conceivable one. But too many seem too quickly to jump in the opposite direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: glmiu11
Policy makers aren't just making decisions for themselves, however. They are making them for all of us.

Utilitarian thought requires that we maximize overall happiness, not wealth. We may very well be faced with the choice between two outcomes that both decrease happiness - a loss of wealth vs. a loss of loved ones in high risk groups - and have to make that tough decision.

Personally, when I look at the high-risk people I care about, I'd rather we do all we can to protect them, even if I personally suffer great economic hardship as a result. When it comes to what personally brings happiness to me, I put a great premium on life. Wealth means little in comparison.

That said, wealth isn't irrelevant. Studies do show that, much as it might disgust us, wealth does, in fact, help make us happy. Economic stability and the lower stress that accompanies it do, in fact, help make us happy. So I'm not saying my answer to this question is the only conceivable one. But too many seem too quickly to jump in the opposite direction.


I started a thread on this days ago....as it was clear the national and world debate would quickly move beyond the fresh story of how many cases/ deaths there are per day..... those will quickly get lost in the world of large numbers.

And it will move on to the economy that's impacting everyone's daily life at fairly extreme levels. That will become the news story.... and it will create tremendously difficult policy decisions with no obviously correct answers...
 
I started a thread on this days ago....as it was clear the national and world debate would quickly move beyond the fresh story of how many cases/ deaths there are per day..... those will quickly get lost in the world of large numbers.

And it will move on to the economy that's impacting everyone's daily life at fairly extreme levels. That will become the news story.... and it will create tremendously difficult policy decisions with no obviously correct answers...
Yeah, I meant to give you a shoutout about that.

https://indiana.forums.rivals.com/threads/biggest-ethical-choice-since.196765/
 
So are you folks need to pull your head out of your ass. We’re in the situation because were behind the eight ball as far as masks, gowns, ventilators and hospital beds. The fact that any of you idiots would think that 6 to 11,000,000 deaths is going to cause the economy to rebound is beyond absurd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
So are you folks need to pull your head out of your ass. We’re in the situation because were behind the eight ball as far as masks, gowns, ventilators and hospital beds. The fact that any of you idiots would think that 6 to 11,000,000 deaths is going to cause the economy to rebound is beyond absurd.
Go **** yourself!
Hey there, buddy. What's your drink of choice this fine evening?
 
Hey there, buddy. What's your drink of choice this fine evening?

I’m not drinking anything but water. I’m sitting here in Florida at age 64 doing whatever I can do to keep my immune system as strong as I can. And that means no alcohol.

This proposal by the lieutenant governor of Texas is tantamount to Hitler’s extermination efforts of World War II. Do you think it’s OK To sacrifice the lives of more people then were killed in the Holocaust?

What are you smoking?
 
I’m not drinking anything but water. I’m sitting here in Florida at age 64 doing whatever I can do to keep my immune system as strong as I can. And that means no alcohol.

This proposal by the lieutenant governor of Texas is tantamount to Hitler’s extermination efforts of World War II. Do you think it’s OK To sacrifice the lives of more people then were killed in the Holocaust?

What are you smoking?
Camels.

You should probably switch to alcohol. You're on edge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartans9312
You know damn well that's not what Zeke is talking about - or what all you anti-ACA folks were whining about back when. Poor form.

No. Tough choices about resource allocation is always present in a totally or substantially publicly funded health care system. While true an epidemic will stress the system and more quickly expose the shortcomings lack of resources bring, but they will always be present. They also limit reserve capacity. A system like ours is wasteful and luxurious in many respects, but it does have a reserve capacity that others do not.
 
No. Tough choices about resource allocation is always present in a totally or substantially publicly funded health care system. While true an epidemic will stress the system and more quickly expose the shortcomings lack of resources bring, but they will always be present. They also limit reserve capacity. A system like ours is wasteful and luxurious in many respects, but it does have a reserve capacity that others do not.
Tough choices about resource allocation are present in all systems. Trying to turn this into some kind of complaint about publicly-funded healthcare, or implying that it's the equivalent of the death panel debate Zeke references, is shameful.
 
It seems to me if Trump had declared a national lockdown, he may have had more power in ending it. But leaving it to the governors makes it outside his control. Even if he ends federal rules, if NY, CA, IL, OH, IN, MI, NJ, CT, and KY, all stay in lockdown, the nation's economy is screwed.
 
I saw a video of a doctor in Spain in years, talking about having to take ventilators off anyone 65 or older to give to younger patients. It was heart wrenching. And thought this will be us in a few weeks. Then hours later, I read an account of this happening in NYC. I’m sorry, but I don’t see how anyone can not be livid that we were so unprepared for this when we were given several months warning and did nothing to prepare. Being short of basics like masks and ventilators is unconscionable. I understand there may be some hard decisions to make about the economy, but that’s not what I’m talking about.
 
I saw a video of a doctor in Spain in years, talking about having to take ventilators off anyone 65 or older to give to younger patients. It was heart wrenching. And thought this will be us in a few weeks. Then hours later, I read an account of this happening in NYC. I’m sorry, but I don’t see how anyone can not be livid that we were so unprepared for this when we were given several months warning and did nothing to prepare. Being short of basics like masks and ventilators is unconscionable. I understand there may be some hard decisions to make about the economy, but that’s not what I’m talking about.

There is a lot of blame. For example, as I heard it explained we bought our emergency stockpiles of masks and ppe in 2007. So that means Obama, Trump, and several congresses share blame that we did not keep buying.
 
My in-laws in their mid 70s told us this a few days ago. Obviously they are worried about it for themselves... but were a lot more worried about the world shutting down, and the repercussions from that.

This situation is pardon the pun, novel, for Americans for 2-3 weeks. After that, it isn't going to hold.
Very soon we’re gonna need to bite the bullet and send able bodied people back to work. This situation is completely unsustainable.
 
Very soon we’re gonna need to bite the bullet and send able bodied people back to work. This situation is completely unsustainable.

How do we block off the older or those with conditions? 40% of those in the hospital are under 60, so it isn't risk free even for you.

We are going to have to have this conversation. We cannot afford for the supply chain to collapse. But the idea that only old people are impacted needs removed from the equation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: largemouth
Very soon we’re gonna need to bite the bullet and send able bodied people back to work. This situation is completely unsustainable.

What does that even look like though? Essential services are broadly defined in the stay home orders. A lot of businesses are closed because of demand not the orders. No one is staying in hotels or flying right now. We can’t make people travel for no real reason.
 
How do we block off the older or those with conditions? 40% of those in the hospital are under 60, so it isn't risk free even for you.

We are going to have to have this conversation. We cannot afford for the supply chain to collapse. But the idea that only old people are impacted needs removed from the equation.
I said nothing about old people. Those that are vulnerable across the spectrum of ages need to be isolated or they can decide to risk it themselves.

This needs to end as soon as we can.
 
What does that even look like though? Essential services are broadly defined in the stay home orders. A lot of businesses are closed because of demand not the orders. No one is staying in hotels or flying right now. We can’t make people travel for no real reason.
Where I live, in PA, all restaurants and bars are shut down by decree. Only takeout is available...they can’t sustain themselves that way.

People aren’t able to do home projects because the kids are home so home stores collapse. Our economy depends on kids being in school and people going to work and shopping in the economy.

This quarantine situation is an agrarian / early manufacturing model and it’s not going to work.
 
I said nothing about old people. Those that are vulnerable across the spectrum of ages need to be isolated or they can decide to risk it themselves.

This needs to end as soon as we can.

How do we isolate 40% of the population, give or take, and not the rest? How do those people get food and medicine if there is no way of knowing if the person stocking the shelves has the virus? I guess if we have enough kits, we could force every person to undergo a test before every work shift. Or even to enter the store as a customer.

As Cortez said, the economy is still going to suck. 1st, 40% will not be participating. 2nd, of the remainder a large percent will be participating a whole lot less.
 
I said nothing about old people. Those that are vulnerable across the spectrum of ages need to be isolated or they can decide to risk it themselves.

This needs to end as soon as we can.
I tend to agree with you in theory. At risk folks stay home. Limit gatherings. No sports. No festivals. People go to work and sanitize the shit out of their work area, wear gloves and masks, etc. The concern though is what marvin wrote. if it impacts younger persons too we could literally have millions of young people infected and in need of hospital care. there's no way to treat that many young people. they may not be dying but again they need hospital care. these are people added to those in need of hospital care unrelated to the virus.

what a tricky mess.
 
Where I live, in PA, all restaurants and bars are shut down by decree. Only takeout is available...they can’t sustain themselves that way.

People aren’t able to do home projects because the kids are home so home stores collapse. Our economy depends on kids being in school and people going to work and shopping in the economy.

This quarantine situation is an agrarian / early manufacturing model and it’s not going to work.

I don’t disagree with you about the pain. But this thought that we all get back out there and the virus will not affect us is not accurate. If that was the case, no one anywhere in the world would have taken any measures. We can’t just muscle this thing away with Murica!!! muscle.
 
How do we isolate 40% of the population, give or take, and not the rest? How do those people get food and medicine if there is no way of knowing if the person stocking the shelves has the virus? I guess if we have enough kits, we could force every person to undergo a test before every work shift. Or even to enter the store as a customer.

As Cortez said, the economy is still going to suck. 1st, 40% will not be participating. 2nd, of the remainder a large percent will be participating a whole lot less.
I think we are going to have to come to the realization that this is not going away. We are going to see hot spots continue. There is a very real possibility that we deal with this indefinitely. Where areas see spikes and then times of limited cases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
How do we isolate 40% of the population, give or take, and not the rest? How do those people get food and medicine if there is no way of knowing if the person stocking the shelves has the virus? I guess if we have enough kits, we could force every person to undergo a test before every work shift. Or even to enter the store as a customer.

As Cortez said, the economy is still going to suck. 1st, 40% will not be participating. 2nd, of the remainder a large percent will be participating a whole lot less.
Why would the 40% not be able to go out, with some PPE perhaps, but what they need and decontaminate it at home? Risk mitigation is possible. Risk avoidance is not.
 
I don’t disagree with you about the pain. But this thought that we all get back out there and the virus will not affect us is not accurate. If that was the case, no one anywhere in the world would have taken any measures. We can’t just muscle this thing away with Murica!!! muscle.
I don’t follow your logic at all. I’m not talking about murican muscle, I’m talking about facing facts. Eventually the farmers and manufacturers are going to stop working if everybody else does. Or better yet, they keep going into the economy because they have to, because we need them to, and this full containment is impossible.

All I’m saying is we need to face the fact that full containment is a pipe dream and eventually, very soon, we’re going to have to rip off the bandaid.
 
Where I live, in PA, all restaurants and bars are shut down by decree. Only takeout is available...they can’t sustain themselves that way.

People aren’t able to do home projects because the kids are home so home stores collapse. Our economy depends on kids being in school and people going to work and shopping in the economy.

This quarantine situation is an agrarian / early manufacturing model and it’s not going to work.
What would be the economic impact of 100 million people sick, a million dead, and a completely overwhelmed healthcare system?
 
I don’t follow your logic at all. I’m not talking about murican muscle, I’m talking about facing facts. Eventually the farmers and manufacturers are going to stop working if everybody else does. Or better yet, they keep going into the economy because they have to, because we need them to, and this full containment is impossible.

All I’m saying is we need to face the fact that full containment is a pipe dream and eventually, very soon, we’re going to have to rip off the bandaid.

Im not being as ass, but I honestly don’t know what that means. Take your restaurant example. So we allow dine in again. What will the numbers look like? Who will be eating in? 2020 is going to be a historically shitty economic year. It just is and we can’t prevent that.

If we can somehow force everyone to get back out there and operate like the virus isn’t here, we have a very real risk on millions of infections. That will overrun and collapse our healthcare systems. That will cause a true panic and civil unrest.
 
Im not being as ass, but I honestly don’t know what that means. Take your restaurant example. So we allow dine in again. What will the numbers look like? Who will be eating in? 2020 is going to be a historically shitty economic year. It just is and we can’t prevent that.

If we can somehow force everyone to get back out there and operate like the virus isn’t here, we have a very real risk on millions of infections. That will overrun and collapse our healthcare systems. That will cause a true panic and civil unrest.
My points are simple:
  1. It is inherently impossible to keep 100% of people in their own homes - if we disagree on that we’re done here
  2. Because of #1, we need to determine realistic risks and mitigate, not avoid them for the betterment of the country
 
My points are simple:
  1. It is inherently impossible to keep 100% of people in their own homes - if we disagree on that we’re done here
  2. Because of #1, we need to determine realistic risks and mitigate, not avoid them for the betterment of the country
It seems that people don't understand how they feed themselves.
They are at just as much risk at the grocery store as they are at work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
It seems that people don't understand how they feed themselves.
They are at just as much risk at the grocery store as they are at work.
Precisely. The only true containment is to close hospitals and close grocery stores and close everything. Because that’s not practical, neither is 100% containment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartans9312
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT