bigbob2

> non-Amazon warehouse workers are treated worse

Source?

Yes, just like when someone suffers life-long health complications because of pneumonia, and then dies of something which otherwise may not have killed them, the cause of death is counted as the most recent event, not pneumonia. I think it suffices to say it goes both ways.

> If it is “only” two times more, then we need to have an adult conversation on how many lives are worth saving vs our society going through something akin to the great depression.

Why is it that only two choices ever exist when this argument is presented? Choose either death by virus or death by status quo economy. It seems like a more pleasant alternative would be reshaping our economic systems to be more resilient against such a crisis which will almost certainly occur again in the future. Maybe the current ownership and distribution models and how they relate to globalism aren't compatible with something that is now simply a fact of life.

True, but NLRA may be applicable.

No doubt, but is CNN/MSNBC/<insert your favorite mainstream media outlet here> actually any less politicized?

Genuinely curious: why was this downvoted when the parent comment was not?

That seems to only include the accident mortality rate. It would likely be even higher if you included deaths from automobile air pollution.

Unrelated but curious, why do you feel it's a completely reasonable tradeoff? In my mind, automobiles have led to a class (and historically race) divide which further segregates and polarizes sects of society.

It is seemingly easy to (roughly) quantify the number of deaths which have occurred as a result of COVID-19, and it is certainly greater than zero. It would seemingly be difficult or impossible to quantify the number of deaths which have occurred as a result of social distancing policies (aka "lockdown"). For that reason alone the certainty of a COVID-19 threat seems greater than the certainty of death by economy.

The alternative seems to be to let millions get sick en masse, potentially leading to similar shutdowns for longer time periods (i.e. failing to "flatten the curve"). I don't think you can claim those businesses would be fine unless you define a timeline to go with your assertion; say, "those businesses would be fine for n weeks."

So instead of reducing hours without cutting pay, or even just finding ways to give parents more flexibility in their work arrangements, we increase the demand and thereby the cost of those services so those employed in less cushy/flexible industries have no recourse.

What is the justification for considering one to be fake and the other real?

I find DDG works for most purposes but I sometimes have to use !s to get meaningful results; even with very specific search terms such as a part number. These days I rarely find a need to use !g but it does happen a few times a week.