Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pmiller2 2235 days ago
> Yes - "Survival of the fittest"

Are you suggesting that people who have the ability to isolate themselves at home while still earning a living are somehow "fitter"? As I suggested before, your argument as a whole amounts to nothing more than the woman who waves the sign saying "I want a haircut". Is your life more important than your barber or stylist's? If not, why are you asking them to risk it for you?
1 comments
umvi 2235 days ago
No, I'm suggesting those that are most vulnerable to covid-19 (old, immuno-compromised, etc) will die off in the first wave and won't be around if there is a second wave. You can't die twice. Thus the mortality rate would plummet.
link
pmiller2 2235 days ago
And, that's exactly why we're sheltering in place.

Which do you value more: those peoples' lives, or corporate profits?

link
umvi 2235 days ago
Ok, that's a bit of a loaded question, and also a false dichotomy.

Obviously economic stability is more valuable than lives to a certain extent because it generates wealth for generations.

I don't think you grasp the gravity of the economic situation. It's not just "corporite profits" being lost. Tens of thousands of people are losing their jobs, businesses, livelihoods, etc, and that number is growing every day. The vast majority of Americans are not software engineers that can work remotely. A paltry $1000 stimulus check isn't going to help the millions of poor feeling the economic pressure. Many will commit suicide before this is over.

link
pmiller2 2235 days ago
No, it is not a false dichotomy. You are literally saying we need to open up now. doing so will kill people: all the best available research says so. Why do you not acknowledge this? Again, I ask: which do you value more, lives or profits? I think I know which, and you simply don't want to say it.

Again, I don't give a shit about capitalism. Do you understand that?

link