Do you agree that there need to be different rules for vulnerable groups and non vulnerable groups? ?
Me: fit, under 35, no pre existing conditions, 90% sure I already had a mild version of it. People like me can go anywhere there is no danger.
Vulnerable groups: all overweight people, the elderly and people with pre existing conditions: the virus is everywhere with prob millions of asymptomatic carriers and there’s no money or resources to test everyone or contact trace everyone.
If the economy doesn’t open then it’s the end of America so it really doesn’t take a rocket scientist which group needs to go back to work and which groups needs to stay at home.
More Questions From This User See All
Answers & Comments
Why doesn't the US have the money or resources to test everyone?
Being a member of the vulnerable group, I am pleased that you will return to work and pay significantly higher taxes to protect me. [Someone has to pay and I'm not working, so it isn't going to be me.] Let me know when there's a successful vaccine for me; until then, you keep working and I'll stay home.
People are getting reinfected all the time. 24 year olds who were otherwise healthy are dying. Your theory is much like Swiss cheese.
Some groups will have to be much more careful when the economy reopens.
If, however, we reopen too soon, the virus will tear through the population and all of this current sacrifice will have been in vain.
The states have to be ready to do serious testing and isolation before reopening.
The governors are going to get the blame if they reopen too soon and it's obvious that the states don't have the testing resources as yet.
"People like me can go anywhere there is no danger."
And what about the people you infect by 'going anywhere'?
Stupidity is not just a danger to yourself.
Obviously that should be what is done.
Forcing the fit and healthy to stay home and not work is counterproductive. It not only destroys the economy and tens of millions of lives, it actually makes it more likely that the vulnerable will be infected. You correctly pointed out that the virus is everywhere and cannot be eliminated through quarantine. So the only way to stop the pandemic is when we reach 70% herd immunity. It's better that people strong enough to fight it off comprise as much of that 70% as possible.
No. Plenty of younger people with no pre-existing health problems have been struck by this virus, and while most have recovered from it, some have died. It's also not yet clear that people cannot be re-infected.
Moreover, even if people have a mild case, they can pass the virus to someone who might be severely and even fatally affected. That's the whole point of social distancing and closing businesses -- to protect those people and keep the health-care system from being overwhelmed.
Of course it's not the "end of America". Do you think the Spanish flu ended America or the world? The Great Depression? They did not. And we're offering far more assistance to individuals and businesses now than the government did in either of those crises.
“People like me can go anywhere, there is no danger” is a very ignorant statement. It’s no wonder younger people have no regard for the protocols. It was people like you who ignored precautions “because it doesn’t affect you” that caused it to spread so much. YOU may well be one of those asymptomatic carriers. While you may be allowed to go back first, doesn’t mean you don’t have to be responsible, take precautions, and follow orders.
Funny how government bureaucrats and most Democrats do not want to follow this practical and straightforward approach.
Now the talking heads are saying it startyed in sept, many folks have coughs, all thought it was flu season, allergies?
who cares if it marks in our blood, like a mono , in the past. this is assinine.