Hacker News Reader

Comment by jskrablin | Hacker News Reader

No it wasn't. Your own scientists came forward with numbers on the cost. And it was too high. Health care system would (it might still) crash, leading to a lot of extra deaths and other unpleasant consequences like backlog of non urgent checkups which can turn out to be urgent several months later.

And please f*ck off with 'only old people die from COVID-19'. Old people with 3 comorbid conditions deserve better than to be left to die because some smartasses feel like it. And there are other groups of people risking dire consequences of COVID-19. Like people with weak immune system. Or ones with diabetes. Or ones being treated for cancer. Should we write off them too?

View on HN

> And please fck off with 'only old people die from COVID-19'. Old people with 3 comorbid conditions deserve better than to be left to die because some smartasses feel like it. And there are other groups of people risking dire consequences of COVID-19. Like people with weak immune system. Or ones with diabetes. Or ones being treated for cancer. Should we write off them too?

Nobody said that, you didn't read my post.

(1) People in risk categories are at risk. One of which is being old, and another is having a comorbid condition, and a huge one is having 3 comorbid conditions while being 82.5. That's a risk category for getting out of your bed in the morning.

(2) Those people, the old, and with comorbid conditions, were to isolate, as they are doing literally right now.

(3) The whole point behind the process was to create a protective buffer around them, otherwise they wouldn't be calling for their isolation.

Take a deep breath.

Where "risk category" includes "has diabetes and high blood pressure" -- these are not what most people think of as high risk conditions.

Yeah. Did you not think someone was going to tell them before they kicked off the plan?

Did they organize a way to get them groceries in the 2 weeks before giving in to lockdowns? Or was granny supposed to shop online?

Did they say they wouldn't? If grannies getting groceries was the only blocker, I'd deliver them myself.

They should have done it already by now, shouldn't they? Granny has been shopping for two weeks while she was supposed to stay home.

It's not the only blocker, just an example of the incompetence with which the UK government has been operating thus far.

They aren't being told. Did you think they were?

The plan isn't happening.

The plan is happening in the UK.

People in vulnerable groups have been told to shield.

There's not much point continuing this conversation: you've been factually incorrect in every single reply you've made to me.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-on-shiel...

(1) This doesn't sounds like their original plan to infect all the youth by locking down the vulnerable and letting the youth out. That is the plan to which I was referring. As you know the UK is on total lockdown for 3 weeks [1]

(2) What is described in this post is what everyone else is doing, keeping the vulnerable inside and providing services such as prescription delivery and at least helping coordinate food delivery. ("Please visit gov.uk/coronavirus-extremely-vulnerable to register for the support that you need. This includes help with food, shopping deliveries and additional care you might need. The government is helping pharmacies to deliver prescriptions. Prescriptions will continue to cover the same length of time as usual.")

(3) It specifically says that everyone in a risk category is getting a letter by March 29th ("The NHS in England is directly contacting people with these conditions to provide further advice.")

I don't really know what you're asking for, or what you think is factually incorrect.

[1] https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/boris-johnson-coronav...

Your answer is coherent and rational and doesn’t deserve to be downvoted. I also agree with you. This situation is taking weeks from absolutely everybody’s lives.

Yes. Old people are still people. And a lot of people that don't die still end up in ICU and can look forward to long term damage.

Having spent a few days in hospital last year for a comparatively mild pneumonia, I'm definitely not looking forward for a repeat.

Without ICU capacity they die.

We written off much larger groups without a blink of an eye. At least in US unexpected expense of $400 puts 1/3 households in financial hardship [1]. What happens with workers when we shut down entire sectors of economy?

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/23/millions-of-americans-are-on...

Hardship beats the hell out of death.

Money is imaginary. It's easy to defer rent payments and mail checks so people can focus on food, medicine, and heat for a while.

I'll be sure to pass on the "money is imaginary" line to my landlord when they're asking where the check is.

In the UK you can now indeed do that.

Not if you're renting you can't. Renters and the self-employed still largely ignored by the government's support package.

Evictions have been halted. The fall out can be dealt with later.

If you're between leases that's quite the pickle.

You can't be between leases easily in the UK as without actively signing a new lease the existing one rolls over into standard rental terms (one months notice from tenants, two from landlords) automatically.

Two-ish months ago I was staying in an AirBNB and had no rental contract.

I have a secure one now, thankfully. I've actually been pretty lucky with the entire situation as I generally play these things fast and loose.

It's not that hard to just not rent or own a home - tons of people are in unofficial house shares etc :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com