You can't assume that. I would argue that a more targeted approach with honesty about who was vulnerable would have resulted in fewer deaths. (Look at Cuomo's decision to put infected people in nursing homes) A blanket approach obscures the focus on who we should be protecting, combined with some very outrageous and arbitrary restrictions and people are going to be less compliant to the policies. One size fits all doesn't work. Like I said many times before, I would have included an individual Covid risk assessment score in our policies.
Your biggest problem is you continue to ignore the non-Covid impacts of the policies, and only want to focus on the deaths. The damage to our mental health and educational systems is immense and long term. In my lifetime there has been nothing that has negatively changed our culture more than the Covid lockdown related policies. More restrictions on free society, self reliance has decreased, productivity has decreased, mental health has decreased. The damage to many children is irreparable.
I'm sorry, but if it were between saving some fat fuck from dying and having children attend school, I'm choosing the children. They aren't responsible for his health.
As predicted, we got to “Those deaths don’t count”.
I can’t go there.
Happy to consider what happens when you have one set of rules for young/healthy and a different set for old/fat. That’s an interesting question.
But, when the actual experts say “it spreads to the nursing homes anyway.”, I believe them. Anything else boils down to “well, I never read any of the case studies and I have no clue how the models work, but I still know my plan would have worked better.”








