The big short
-
@George-K said in The big short:
lockdowns intended to contain the coronavirus pandemic are worse for him than the disease itself.
Fixed it for him.
-
@Copper said in The big short:
I'm not surprised somebody did the math and came up with this answer.
Link please?
-
I have a lifetime limit on my insurance. That's fine with me.
Someday maybe I'll get ambitious and try to figure out if that's enough.
From the tone of your question, I assume you feel like the government should give me something extra for coronavirus, just because there are lots of headlines.
I don't.
-
@jon-nyc said in The big short:
@Copper said in The big short:
I'm not surprised somebody did the math and came up with this answer.
Link please?
It's up there in GK's post.
-
Don’t see any math there. Nor any assumptions one would have to make in order to do the math.
-
@Copper No I'm just trying to get to the crux of your position. You're advocating for a valuation of life to determine how bad the economy should get before we favor it over human lives. You've mentioned that others have already made this calculation.
I'm straight up asking you how much you think your life is worth. If you get sick and are on a ventilator, how much should the hospital pay to keep you alive? Is $1 million too much? Is $10,000?
What's your number?
-
@jon-nyc said in The big short:
Don’t see any math there. Nor any assumptions one would have to make in order to do the math.
That's why I posted what I posted.
Which was, someone did the math and reached the conclusion.
I do not have any information about the math other than it was done. This is based on the quote "lockdowns intended to contain the coronavirus pandemic are worse than the disease itself"
I guess it's hard to say what sort of math he might have to back up that conclusion. There is no question in my mind that the longer the lockdowns continue the closer to the truth this quote becomes.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in The big short:
@Copper No I'm just trying to get to the crux of your position. You're advocating for a valuation of life to determine how bad the economy should get before we favor it over human lives. You've mentioned that others have already made this calculation.
I'm straight up asking you how much you think your life is worth. If you get sick and are on a ventilator, how much should the hospital pay to keep you alive? Is $1 million too much? Is $10,000?
What's your number?
What am I willing to pay is a different than what it is worth.
But as a practical matter I guess the answer is the same.
What is anything worth? The answer is, whatever a willing buyer will pay.
In the case of trying to save my life as you describe the answer is simple, whatever my insurance will cover. I think that is a couple million lifetime maximum.
And that is the insurance company doing the paying.
I don't think the hospital should pay anything. Did you really mean to ask what should the hospital pay?
-
All safety-related action has a cost-benefit aspect to it. We don't make cars as safe as they can be, we make them as safe as we can and have them remain affordable.
However, listening to the very wealthy pontificate about this is a bit freaking much. They'd be happy for me to go back to work? Well, surprise surprise, I'd be happy for them to give all their money away to help support the less fortunate.
-
-
@Copper Well, yeah. The entire insurance system is based on a health situation that doesn't include a pandemic. It's really delusional to think they'll be able to cover all of your care in addition to everyone else's.
So you think the number is whatever the buyer is willing to pay. If they aren't willing or able to cover your hospital stay, then, you're okay with not going and dying?
-
@Horace Dead people can't work. That's why I think the best thing for the economy is to place public safety as paramount. But no I don't think that means shut things down.
Please love yourself.
-
@Aqua-Letifer Paramount, priceless, choose your word. The bottom line is how much unhappiness are you willing to sow in exchange for lives.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in The big short:
@Copper Well, yeah. The entire insurance system is based on a health situation that doesn't include a pandemic. It's really delusional to think they'll be able to cover all of your care in addition to everyone else's.
So you think the number is whatever the buyer is willing to pay. If they aren't willing or able to cover your hospital stay, then, you're okay with not going and dying?
It's not really a matter of their willingness, they have committed to certain provisions.
I'm OK with them abiding by those conditions.
I am not OK with them not abiding by those conditions.
It is not delusional to expect them to pay to cover what they committed to cover.
I am not aware of insurance companies saying they won't honor commitments. Is this happening? I actually think I saw the opposite happening, I received an email from my insurance company saying they would cover expenses related to COVID. To be honest I didn't pay much attention to it. They may have been forced by the government to do this.
-
That’s right. But I don’t hold the view that lives can be infinitely valued by society. There are trade offs.
-
When you have two sides that are worlds apart, it leaves all kinds of room in the middle for reasonable solutions.
Rather than snipe at each other, why not discuss what would seem reasonable to you?
By the way, I wish they would start qualifying statements such as “government mandated shutdowns”. Not everything is shutdown, many of the businesses that are shuttered did so voluntarily without Government mandates, and the government mandated stay at home orders have come from the state level, not the Federal.
-
@Copper Still haven't shared your number.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in The big short:
Rather than snipe at each other, why not discuss what would seem reasonable to you?
Restaurants have curbside pickup, delivery, and also double as grocery distributors. (They're already doing that last in my area.)
Retail stores do the same with curbside and online ordering. Strict limits on who can be in the store at any given time. Employees given sanitary equipment. (And really what they should be doing is tripling down on their online presence. Well-targeted Facebook and Instagram ads can be like printing money if done right.)
Offices stay remote. Because come on.
Maybe in warehouses, have a few more people on staff, not less, so that packages can be moved around through a zone system instead of every worker crossing paths with every other.
Ramp the hell out of sanitary wipe/hand sanitizer production, along with masks, and basically make it mandatory that companies provide these on-site.
So okay those are my stupid ideas. What are everyone else's?
