so to claim doctors have zero compassion with those who do not directly affect their "income" or "numbers" is a horrible statement to make.
I said nothing of the sort. I said, in effect, to the man with a hammer everything looks like a nail.
you should rely on stories from people who know conditions first hand and not from those with political views and intentions who simply fabricate specious rhetoric.
Given your political leanings, I should hope you would find the washington post and CDC credible.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/09/16/coronavirus-dementia-alzheimers-deaths/?arc404=true
the useless people, right?
I believe it is rational and objective to conclude the loss of 40 years of lifespan is more significant than the loss of 5 years of lifespan. Medicine normally agrees with me, which is why they regularly discriminate against septa & octagenerians when harvesting organs for transplant.
Furthermore, I think 325 million people losing 25% of their freedoms for 1 year is analogous to 81 million people being locked in prison for a year. And I think 81 million people effectively being in prison for 1 year is roughly analogous to 1 million 78-year lifespans lost. On the other hand, the average age of a covid death is over 60. The average 60 year old in the US has a life expectancy of 22 years (we'll even ignore the fact the average covid death had at least 1 comorbidity and thus a much shorter expected lifespan)
The current "best guess" infection fatality rate from the CDC is 0.5%. With zero intervention, we would expect 80% or so of the population to get infected before the virus could no longer spread effectively. Of those 260 million infections, we would expect 1.3 million deaths. And those 1.3 million deaths would represent about 1/4 of a lifespan (20 years lost of an 80-year lifespan) - so they would be like 325,000 full lifespans lost.
So in my libertarian hyper rational hypo emotional view, doing absolutely nothing at all would have resulted in fewer lost/wasted lifespans than our noble-but-misguided efforts to "save lives."
how about the 666 and growing number of children the Trump administration took away from their parents?
there are only four kids Trump has any concern for.
What does this have to do with covid19? I'm a libertarian - I'm more "open borders" than most, but even I realize the need for immigration control (our democracy could easily be overwhelmed by unrestricted immigration of peoples (and states) who don't share our values).
If a family were to habitually shoplift, we would punish and parents and send the children to be with someone hopefully more responsible because we recognize the children don't really belong in jail. We don't have that option with illegal immigrants. Obama locked up children as well, but most felt Obama could do no wrong. The guy won a Nobel peace price despite sending troops on combat missions in nearly every country on the planet.
Given that illegal immigration is not a new problem and isn't going away, we probably should construct new facilities capable of detaining whole families until they can have their day in court and be admitted legally or deported.
if this pandemic was handled the same way it was in South Korea (first death due to the virus happened on the same day in both countries), we wouldn't have had the first shutdown... well over 200,000 Americans would still be alive and i could be sitting at a bar having a beer and doing the NYT crossword. frankly if the pandemic had been handled in a manner where lives were placed above the Dow Jones average Trump's 1% cares about, we wouldn't be the worst country in the entire world at containing the virus. the only reason kids are not in school is solely due to the lack of any appreciable leadership along with the complete lack of a unified plan other than wishing the virus away.
We're not South Korea - we're a lot more free, we're a lot more diverse, and we have massive & porous borders. And, in my estimation, perhaps only 100,000 of those Americans would still be alive - 100,000 of them were very unwell already and unlikely to live more than 6 months anyway.
the world will be a safer place now that he is on the verge of being gone.
If Democrats win both Georgia Senate seats and choose to ram through policies despised by 1/2 the country I think the world, or at least America, will be decidedly less safe. The last civil war killed 2% of the population - equivalent to 6.5 million today - and involved much less sophisticated weaponry. I think America continuing to oscillate between partisan extremes, each trying to run up their score during their fleeting moments of power - make civil war more likely with each passing year.
For a base rate comparison, the average life expectancy of a superpower is about 200 years (the US is ~240-244 depending on whether you count the declaration or the British surrender). Superpowers with vast geographies and politically diverse populations tend to have shorter lifespans (bad for us) while superpowers where the population can affect change in the government tend to have longer lifespans (good for us).
