Hacker News Reader

Comment by swatcoder | Hacker News Reader

That’s an aritificially hostile take, isn’t it?

Most people read “the pandemic” as the global event that started around the beginning of 2020 and certainly that’s how this article and it’s title are using it.

Even if you don’t read the article, it feels like a leap to assume that they’re suggesting that the virus itself somehow made people drink more irresponsibly or made people collectively more vulnerable to alcohol. Has anyone suggested that? Would anyone?

Of course it’s referring to the totality of the experience: the virus, the anxiety, the necessary closures, the precautionary mandates and other parts of “the response”, etc etc

View on HN

I'd say it's mainly that those who have been heavily advocating all of the lockdown measures throughout the pandemic have behaved more or less like there were no side effects and we should do them for the greater good (basically virtue signaling). The other isle has advocated that maybe we shouldn't cause that kind of turmoil in society just to spare a few years of lifespan of the elderly (which is a harsh take but doesn't make it untrue).

And just thinking about stupid concepts like outdoor masking makes me want to crack open a bottle of vodka.

> those who have been heavily advocating all of the lockdown measures throughout the pandemic have behaved more or less like there were no side effects

That's so alien to me.

I don't know who gabs around the water cooler with you, but I've never met a person who would say that and can't imagine that many involved officials would. The exception really only being people who are known for big theatrics, and those aren't good people to measure others by for any politicized issue.

Most people I've known and most people I've seen have argued that it was a hard governance problem with no painless paths through it, but that there was convincing evidence (to them) that the side effects of issuing precautionary guidance/mandates were more bearable than the catastrophic effects of less action.

But obviously, we must be moving around and watching/reading things in very different circles.

While outdoor masking is silly, the your rage seems disproportionate if that is the source. I've been accused of 'virtue signaling' during the pandemic, but supporting family members whose immune systems were largely disable from chemotherapy makes putting a mask on seem like a small sacrifice. Your take on 'spare a few years of lifespan' is perhaps not untrue, but is an easy 'internet take' when there is anonymity. It is less cute when one is face-to-face with the disposable person, or to someone who watched a family member die.

I'd find it harder to tell a young healthy person they had to lose years of life, their job, their house, than to tell a 70 year old or obese person we aren't doing that to spare them.

And you're right, rage is the correct word. Me and lots of others are enraged that years of life were taken. The old people in America already got enough at everybody else's expense. I want my 2 years back and I won't stop being angry until I get it. And a whole lot of people my age feel the same.

“Old people in America” were heavily impacted but. I can tell you don’t work in health care, as they aren’t the only people that suffered either directly or indirectly . My grandfather, who served in WWII until he was shot, never said he “wanted his time back”(inherently flawed logic). Years of his life and a chunk of his health was taken for something he hated doing but needed to be done. My other grandfather left Eastern Europe in the 1930s and I can remember friends of his that had numbers tattooed on their arms— my aunt was permanently childless for reason I didn’t learn until I was older. Since forever, senseless things happen to people. Some become victims.. Wearing masks and no dinner-and-a-movie sucks. Loss of jobs is real. In the absence if mask mandates and shut-downs, would the economy have flourished under the pandemic? I dont know. I am confident it wouldn’t have been a panacea for the young or old. We have it really good here, in the context of what is going on in Europe right now I think about this a lot. I hope you find happiness.

You're correct, but also, "the pandemic" in that sense is so broad that it's not super helpful. It often feels equivalent to saying "the culture of the 60s produced Jimi Hendrix". What culture? What about it? Just artistic trends, or economic factors, or political factors? (which are themselves hand-wavy terms, and not all inclusive). It feels lazy

I was agreeing with your comment until:

>>the necessary closures

Are you suggesting that the state needed to force private establishments to close, and that - putting aside the human rights implications of this abridgement of private-property/free-association rights - we can definitively say the net effect of these closures was positive?

Right. If the headline said, "Alcohol-related deaths spike when people lose their jobs" it wouldnt be a surprise. The pandemic was unique and had many complicating factors that impacted lots of groups in different ways.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com