What way does hurting the economy cost lives. I am curious. Please be specific. I am tired of the idiotic clams that using non proved medications for COVID 19 medicines can't hurt anyone. Tell that to people with Lupus who can't buy their medicine. Now telling me that hurting the economy kills is another idiotic idea. Back it up with facts, not internet rambling, or political sabre rattling, but facts. Oh, by the way to date these untested for COVID 19 medications have not proved that they make a numerical improvent and that is a FACT!

Speyside wrote:

Victor, you say some on the margins. How does this compare to the numbers if shelter in place was not mandated. The real question is will slowing the infection rate lower the death count. If it does then it was the correct choice, if not then it wasnt. But this logicless BS needs to end. I know you are shaking it up to get some chuckles, but you of all people know assumptions without data are pure BS.

Speyside wrote:

Course not. But it's also not lives vs dollars.
People dying or being hospitalized en mass also costs money. Treating 100k people all at once costs more than treating 20k every 2 weeks over the course of 2 months (or however it would be dragged out) because scaling up the necessary medical equipment is a resource cost.
People being hospitalized in huge amounts is a large disruption to our economy. These are people who may not be insured, will not be able to make their rent or mortgage payments etc etc.

Like I said. If it was just "let some extra people die and be able to keep the economy trucking along" I'd throw all you old and/or co-morbid people under the economy bus... (except frank, we'll keep frank quarantined for our nation's good). But someone made good arguments to me that letting a bunch of people die/get sick in the short term will still have the economic chaos we're seeing now, but with extra added medical chaos.

victor809 wrote: