[lotsofpulp]

I have no problem with sacrificing the elderly for the benefit of the kids. A few months of shutdown was reasonable, but shutting schools down for a couple years is too big of a price to pay.

Also, my kids were in daycare the whole time outside of Mar to May 2020, and they were spreading all sorts of viruses just like they were before COVID. How the government chose to allow the most prolific spreaders to congregate day after day, but prevent less prolific spreaders is very inconsistent logic.

[bcrosby95]

What state had schools closed for years? I see this claim a lot, but even in California hybrid was available ~1 year after shutdown, and full return to school was available for the fall after that (so about 1.3 years)

[lotsofpulp]

Washington was pretty egregious. There were random closures and testing requirements that made planning impossible, all the way until April or May 2022, I think. And it is cover-your-ass related stuff, because no one below the state level wanted to be on the hook if the state was still going on and on with nebulous reactions.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/seattle-...

[geraldwhen]

All parents understand. I would end my life in an instant for my kids.

[hotpotamus]

Would you end the life of others for your kids?

[geraldwhen]

Of course.

[starik36]

> I have no problem with sacrificing the elderly for the benefit of the kids.

Read what you just wrote and ponder on it for a bit.

[pc86]

If you're at increased risk of contracting a deadly disease, you should take steps not to contract said disease, up to and including isolation, quarantine, testing, etc. What you shouldn't do is use political pressure to permanently stunt the education and growth of an entire generation of kids by insisting that elementary school children can just go to class on Zoom. 40% of 8th graders are deficient in math[0]. That didn't happen in a vacuum, it happened because schools were shut down. It happened because we expected 7 year olds to sit at a desk and watch a computer screen all day instead of allowing them to go to school.

[0] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/test-scores-show-how-...

[0xy]

Are you proposing that organ transplants be prioritized to the 80 year old chain smoker over the healthy 12 year old?

Are you proposing that old people should be the first off a sinking ship?

Old people have lived life. They should have stayed home and isolated. Kids had practically zero risk. The difference in risk between a healthy 12 year old and the average 80 year old was orders of magnitude different.

[lotsofpulp]

I have pondered about it for over a decade. Our societies drastically prioritize the elderly over the young. They are the ones with political power, after all.

Here’s an easy example: why does the US pay doctors more via Medicare (for people over 65) than via Medicaid (for poorer people, including kids).

[giantg2]

That's not a great example. One is a single payer system funded by workers and the other is government welfare. Plus, the elderly can be on both programs simultaneously. If anything, this is an example of money influencing politics since the people who have been paying those taxes for Medicare are more likely to donate to politicians than people who require Medicaid.

[lotsofpulp]

> If anything, this is an example of money influencing politics since the people who have been paying those taxes for Medicare are more likely to donate to politicians than people who require Medicaid.

That is what I wrote, the elderly have more political power.

The same legislature that allocates society’s resources towards healthcare for people age 65+ also chooses to allocate less resources to people who happen to be poor (or have poor parents).

The Additional Medicare Tax is another lovely reminder of how society’s resources, because funnily enough, even though it has been widely known Medicaid does not even pay enough to keep the lights on, there is no Additional Medicaid Tax.

[giantg2]

"That is what I wrote"

Could you point that out? I saw that the elderly had power - not the wealthy. Many elderly are also poor. Much of the political influence on Medicare comes from those who are working as they near retirement. For example, talks about raising the required age do not affect those already receiving it, but future recipients. Those are the people involved. The people receiving it could care less since the already have their's.

The reason the poor recieve less is because it's not single payer and is funded by other taxes. The general population (voters) feels that the vare minimum is all they deserve (for better or worse, that's how it is).

Again, there is a Medicare tax because it is a non-means-tested single payer system. There is no Medicaid specific tax because it is intended for a small minority of indignant individuals. As with other welfare programs, it paid for out of the general taxes and nothing specific.

It's a money and voter base issue. Yeah, that can be correlated with being old, but there's more to it.

[lotsofpulp]

> I saw that the elderly had power - not the wealthy.

Multiple groups can have varying amounts of power. In this case, I am using the fact that one group is getting a better benefit than another group as proof that the group getting the better benefit has power. Why else would they have it, and why else would those that do not have go without?

> The reason the poor recieve less is because it's not single payer and is funded by other taxes. The general population (voters) feels that the vare minimum is all they deserve (for better or worse, that's how it is).

This is my point. Voters skew older, and providing healthcare to the poor at least equivalent to Medicare is not a priority.

> Again, there is a Medicare tax because it is a non-means-tested single payer system.

This is incorrect. Medicare premiums get more and more means tested every year.

https://www.ncpssm.org/documents/medicare-policy-papers/medi...

Even Social Security is means tested, look up bend points in the benefit formula.

And at the end of the day, all taxes are fungible. Government received money and pays money for benefits. Who gets how much is a political exercise.

[bugglebeetle]

We need to pick which out-group to sacrifice vs. take care of everyone is the kind of thinking that creates most of America’s problems.

[ponector]

Couldn't elderly think about themselves? If they have poor health - stay at home, make a zoom call instead of in person visit.

Rising a child is incredible difficult nowadays, and government shouldn't close schools and daycare.

[op00to]

My child's school was online-only instruction from March to June, and reopened in September 2020 for in-person instruction. They did not miss one day of instruction. No idea what you're talking about.

[caddemon]

A lot of schools remained remote in fall 2020 - depended on the school, and it's not exactly easy to switch between districts. Also, the quality of instruction in spring 2020 was absolutely affected as teachers adapted to remote and everyone dealt with the general chaos. Again could vary by school, but I think saying no instruction was missed is naive. "Days in class" is a horrible metric for learning, and there absolutely were classrooms where quality of learning degraded.

It was a shitty situation all around, and I'm definitely not arguing that schools should have remained open that spring. But it's silly to pretend that education was not affected across the country by the switch to remote.

[op00to]

OP said "shutting schools down for a couple years". That did not happen in the US.