So what should be done?
1 Like
Is English your first language? Do you understand the implications of the conditional tense?
Not Surprised this is hasnt been cover by the irish ‘media’.
We have to learn to live with it, just like we live with every other infectious disease. Protect the vulnerable as best we can and practice the measures we know work to avoid major outbreaks. Of all the possible futures, the most likely one imo is this virus and associated disease will be with us for decades or centuries, mutating like a flu or cold virus. The best we can hope for is a vaccine that sort of works like a flu vaccine.
4 Likes
well, look who keep came crawling back! 
after the big retirement announcement
From reading the people interviewed I wouldnt say all of them are. Someone compared the lockdown to a nazi regime so i doubt they are right wing
It’s a little unsettling how naive you actually are.
Like all left wing loons, @glasagusban believes that a few thousand people marching peacefully in Berlin equates to mass murder, while simultaneously supporting worldwide BLM protests attended by millions, including marches in Dublin which greatly exceeded this German protest on a per capita basis.
It’s a classic example of cognitive dissonance.
4 Likes
There’s being varying reports on who turned out. I’ve read that it was the hard left, hard right, libertarians, constitutionalists, anti vaxxers and several others. I think the NYT just wrapped it in a Neo Nazi bow.
1 Like
I clicked the link you put up and it said far right. Most likely it was far right in Germany. Afd have about enough support to bring out a couple of thousand @ironmoth type wankers in Germany.
Nothing to see here
1 Like
Who are the fellas in the black?
Biggest danger with the far right is they hijack any cause, it loses support and anyone who supports it regardless of their opinions is labelled as far right
1 Like
The question posed related to the conditional tense, could you have answered it?
Okay. A most fair summary.
But what does the rubric “live with it” mean – key point – as concrete state policy?
Answer the question.
Live with it means get on with our lives, armed with the knowledge that there is a dangerous virus out there, but we can mitigate the risk of catching it by sensible social distancing, good hygiene, wearing masks where appropriate, etc. The danger isn’t universal though, mortality is directly related to age and the health of the population (obesity, heart disease, diabetes are significant comorbidities). The risk of mortality from this disease increases exponentially, an 80 year old has a 1,000 times higher risk of mortality than a 20 year old.
It doesn’t fit the broadly accepted narrative, but this quote from Stanford’s Michael Levitt is the harsh reality: “I think we’ve (baby boomers) really screwed up. We’ve polluted the earth, allowed the population grow by three times in the past 70 years, caused the problem of global warming, and now left the next generation with a real mess in order to save a relatively small number of very old people”.
2 Likes
I agree entirely with most of those comments.
The problem is the roulette factor. Yes, the increased risk groups and the high risk groups are established. But who wants to play roulette – especially if over 45 and/or interacting regularly with vulnerable people – around getting this virus, when the peril is as serious as serious can be?
I also happen to think the mark of a civilized society, economic realities accepted, is that everyone’s life, in principle, is equally valuable. Stepping away from this principle is a tilt on an extremely dangerous slide.
2 Likes
I do not understand that quotation. Meaning: it is nonsense. Mobilizing the fact that everyone dies is to mistake an inexorable condition for a plausible argument. Rhetoric husks itself when it relies on a condition. Rhetoric, to live, requires the yeast of contingency.