Vendrah
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2017
- Messages
- 1,977
- MBTI Type
- NP
- Enneagram
- 952
Deaths are decreasing, though.
Deaths are decreasing, though.
I don't know why people like to measure the pandemic this much in the terms of deaths. Since there can be evident medical damage even if the person survives.
Not to mention that high number of infections disrupt education process, rises public debt that is already in the red in many places, disrupts production and sales of goods (and many services), removes focus from other problems that really matter and can't really wait, it increases ethnic or various security related tensions (which create deaths that aren't on the list). It really is much more complex than "some people died".
You should had reserved that for [MENTION=20035]anticlimatic[/MENTION], not for me!
I think both numbers are important, but it isnt more disastrous if less people are dying.
What you said serves as a short answer to the post above this post.
Well, what I type is usually addressed/opened to the entire forum. Not just to quoted person.
Regarding bolded part.
My point was exactly that even with reduction in death you can still have increase of the problems in general if new cases are still coming in decent numbers. This is especially the case since now we are something like 6 months into the time when the pandemic went global. What means that many reserves and options we had months ago are now drained on personal, national and global level. What makes it easier for things to go wrong or problems to pile up. Therefore it really is much more complicated than just deaths.
Plus towards worldometer graph deaths are more stagnant over the last weeks than actually decreasing. However as the northern hemisphere fully enters cold days the numbers are likely to increase actually.
I still feel deaths are more relevant since they are more shocking, you know? Less people dying with more infections is more preferable, I think.. But I understand your concerns. Also I got that if we have no infections we got no deaths but if we got no deaths we can still get more infections.
Well, deaths are "textbook" concern. However you can't judge the whole situation just based on deaths, or you will simply miss good chunk of the actual havoc that is going on. There are countries and regions where you basically have complete social implosion without some huge spike in death. However the pandemic related problems that hit into already large problems simply crashed the tower of card on local levels. What we could see globally because the world is sitting on something like 270 000 billion dollars of debt. In other words triggering that avalanche doesn't require that many deaths to happen, even if this is likely to produce many more deaths. This probably wouldn't happen but new cases on their own just add to the anxiety and panic, what should be underestimated. This is exactly why I said that you can't really fix the economy until you remove the virus. Since people simply don't want to spend that much.
Despite deaths and disease, people on Brazil arent really panicking, they are too busy not caring actually.
I agree that you cannot judge the whole situation with deaths only, but it is a fact that the deaths to infected ratio is dropping to lower levels, meaning that COVID is more easily handled and/or is getting weaker.
What if the fuck lied about it just so he could get out of the next debate?
Or so he could later downplay the severity of Covid by saying it wasn’t any worse than a normal flu for him?