-
That is essentially Trump’s argument.... massively ironically. Not that he’s coming at it from that perspective obviously.
I think the general consensus is that an unchecked and virile virus won’t help things either way though right?
-
I sadly imagine the deaths from economic consequences may be greater. But understandably governments have to act to protect the stability of our health systems and immediate lives.
Unfortunately deaths from a vast array of inequalities are accepted as the norm in our current global system - wealth inequality, climate change, air pollution etc...
-
Annual global deaths from starvation ticked past 2 million this week whilst Covid-19 deaths for the equivalent period are still under 17,000.
If Covid-19 goes unchecked throughout the world then even a conservative 1% mortality rate will see 78 million dead so it has the capacity for outstripping deaths from starvation (albeit for a short while).
You are reading a single comment by @Saffronspokes and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Wrongcog
peet
Greenbank
@Saffronspokes
Annual global deaths from starvation ticked past 2 million this week whilst Covid-19 deaths for the equivalent period are still under 17,000.
With a global recession now pretty much accepted by everyone when will arguments start to be made that we've prioritised the wrong thing and the economic consequences of our actions now will cost more lives later on than we're saving now?