- Joined
- Jan 20, 2016
- Messages
- 11,863
- Reaction score
- 13,480
An economist would focus on what's best for the economy just as physicians focus on physical health. Both are incomplete approaches to such a complex and far reaching problem. The current "save every life at all costs" approach puts me in mind of people against assisted death at all costs. Quality of life must be taken into account, especially if one is to buy into the "we're all in this together" line.
Obviously we're not all in it together if we're so willing to dismiss others concerns. That much is obvious.
The idea of "We must do anything to save even a single life," is definitely dangerous. Even when politicians don't overtly say the words, it appears that a lot of them are implicitly making decisions based on that ethos. It's a naive belief that assumes that a utopic result is possible. Modern people are pretty fragile; it probably appeals to the electorate base because they feel entitled to a life without discomfort or the smallest amount of risk. In practice that kind of mindset often leads to ignoring the needs of many people in order a save a minority, creating a greater harm. I think the big question mark of the crisis will be the long term economic effects, and as usual it'll be young people who pay for it the most.