miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
All I can honestly say is that it would be one heck of a coincidence if each and every one of them caught the virus at home or at friends'. Possible, of course. But nonetheless remarkable.
Just yesterday our governor in NY, Adolf Cuomo, stated that they were seeing a high percentage of new cases coming from people who have been staying at home the last two months.
So not all that remarkable....especially considering that the virus was well spread in the bigger cities and the more populous areas of high-destination countries.
Basically...a lot of people were already infected...and then shut themselves in without knowing it...or it's due to the pseudo shut-in nonsense, because people still need to go out to get basic necessities.
Believe it or not, for some of us, that is our default position in life, notwithstanding that sometimes excruciatingly difficult choices have to be made. Every life is precious and if a life can be kept going and the person doesn't want to checkout just yet, then keep it going.
Most people consider life as precious...but there is a point of diminishing returns that has to be considered. Would you risk the lives of 20 to save one...???
That happens often...and then 5 people die to save one...and all they get is a hero's funeral. What about their precious lives...?
Our politicians who forced the shutdowns take all the virus recovery numbers as "lives saved"...which is total BS, since most of those people would have probably survived anyway...and the ones that died, would have died anyway.
What about all the people who have been killed by the ventilators they were put on...? Is that just "part of" the saving of life attempts, and that's acceptable?
IOW...the saving of life is not a guarantee. The risk is always there. Telling people that if they stay home it will save lives is a lot of propaganda but no guarantee.
To destroy the livelihood, the economy, the lifestyles of MILLIONS of people, not to mention the number of actual lives that will be lost from all that (and not the virus itself), so that we can *possibly* save some lives from the virus...is that a fair trade-off?
There's a point were reality has to be faced, as bad as it may be. So just pushing that aside with the notion that "every life if precious"...is pretty reckless, IMO.
It's like..."we'll worry about the fallout from our reactions to the virus down the road...not now".
We send soldiers to war.
We all hope that no one will get killed...but we know that's not going to happen, and some will die so the rest of us can go on.