I've had this conversation on this forum before... I'm vehemently opposed to government mandated forceful lockdown. I do not condone the destruction of a country's economy and the decimation of the middle class to try to save the most vulnerable of society*. One should not be so eager to relinquish those freedom given to us by our creator and defended with blood by our forefathers. As Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
The reality is that this isn't the first time that the world has had to deals with a deadly pandemic but it sure is the first time that the healthy have been force to quarantine. It has always been that the infirm and most vulnerable are the ones required to isolate. What changed and why? The fact that there are things just as deadly or even more so right now that are totally ignored by the powers that be speaks volumes about the CV19 frenzy.
Some 700 million of the world's most vulnerable people will require food assistance, according to the U.N. humanitarian office, which is asking wealthy nations to commit $90 billion in aid.
www.npr.org
.
Tuberculosis is caused by bacteria that most often affect the lungs. TB is curable and preventable and is spread from person to person through the air.
www.who.int
Learn tips to protect yourself and others from road traffic injuries at home or abroad.
www.cdc.gov
.
And on and on but only CV19 need these extreme measures.
We are hurting the world economy, the middle class, our children, our livelihood and our sanity for what exactly? To save a few co-morbid or older people that are on their way out anyway (I'm just being pragmatic)? Are we sure it will be worth it when all is said and done? With all our sacrifice and effort we still weren't able to save
1,058,104 that have died of CV19 and who knows if these people would have died anyway.
*note: I'm in the most vulnerable group of society.