One of the frequent arguments we hear from those pushing for these lockdown / stay at home orders is that this disease is only really deadly to the elderly and those with preexisting conditions such as diabetes and obesity. For those under 50 in good health don't have much to worry about. Statistically this is a good argument as the vast majority of people who have died are in those categories. Many of the people making this argument though have argued for a culture of life that values life from conception to the grave. If we are to believe in a culture of life though how much do we really value life if we just consider that the elderly are just expendable when it comes to getting back to a full economy and a normal life for most of us? I was listening to the John Prine song "Hello in There" earlier. That is a song about the how the elderly are isolated and was written decades before this current crisis. Our society long before this has not treated the elderly well. Under the arguments put out it is not only acceptable but that we should isolate the elderly even more or just expect them to die off. With luck all of us will end up elderly, some of us are much closer than we like to think and some of us are already there. I think it is dangerous to start thinking of a group as being expendable especially when that is one that we ll might be or already are part of. To say as Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, "Some things are more important than living" doesn't sound like much like a culture of life.
They have decided to draft the elderly to fight this war, because they are not elderly. This is not unheard of. From Notes on Democracy: Spoiler I pass over the details, and pause only to recall the fact that the American people, by the end of 1917, were in such terror that they lived in what was substantially a state of siege, though the foe was 3,000 miles away and obviously unable to do them any damage. It was only the draft, I believe, that gave them sufficient courage to attempt actual hostilities. That ingenious device, by relieving the overwhelming majority of them of any obligation to take up arms, made them bold. Before it was adopted they were heavily in favour of contributing only munitions and money to the cause of democracy, with perhaps a few divisions of Regulars added for the moral effect. But once it became apparent that a given individual, John Doe, would not have to serve, he, John Doe, developed an altruistic eagerness for a frontal attack in force. For every Richard Roe in the conscript camps there were a dozen John Does thus safely at home, with wages high and the show growing enjoyable. So an heroic mood came upon the people, and their fear was concealed by a truculent front.
Many old folks watch Fox News and they all vote. There is some evidence that they are starting to realize that Trump and the GOP leaders are more worried about making money for themselves than saving the old folks lives. Supposedly they are starting to swing against Dear Leader and it may be why he is not making a fool of himself daily on his Corona afternoon talks.
The parallels are haunting and fitting in this thread too: If only there was some kind of concentrated camp we could put the incurably ill and elderly into: https://www.britannica.com/event/T4-Program "An important criterion was economic. Nazi officials assigned people to this program largely based on their economic productivity. The Nazis referred to the program’s victims as “burdensome lives” "patients considered incurable, according to the best available human judgment of their state of health, can be granted a mercy killing.” "Pseudoscientific rationalizations for the killing of the “unworthy” were bolstered by economic considerations. According to bureaucratic calculations, the state could put funds that went to the care of criminals and the insane to better use—for example, in loans to newly married couples."
Yeah I saw that. The argument you hear a lot including here on Clutchfans is that these people are going to die anyway. It's not just the elderly too but people bring up that most of these people dying are people with pre-existing conditions like heart disease, diabetes, asthma and obesity. How many Americans have at lease one of those conditions?
Well according to "shapiro" it is economic actuary tables that should define it. So its where you fall inside or outside the standard deviation of THEIR values. I wonder where a guy like "shapiro" would have landed in 1933? hmm the thought police ..their tables and their values. Obesity/ overweight against say bmi values is not reflective always? Should I cut weight like an mma guy so the gestapo err docs will report me as " not burdensome" ?? Id rather be ripped and 195 at 511 then underweight and pigeon chest at 165. Oh well the actuary tables tell me to chill. So just remember when it comes to metrics and sliding rules - You didn't cross the border...the border crossed you my friend. You had too much taco bell and you pooch has put you in that bracket of "burdensome life" especially when your big gulp consumption is not meeting your output. too much of the kids cheetos in quarantine and have become a "useless eater" Sorry line to the left for "unfit" ...dont worry it will be a "good death" https://www.ushmm.org/information/e...pecial-focus/nazi-persecution-of-the-disabled
Related to the thread: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/us-l...2afc90c?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter GOP Policies Are Shortening American Lives A new study suggests that state disparities in life expectancy come down to the conservative-liberal divide. More at the link above