Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="zubenelgenubi" data-source="post: 4679108" data-attributes="member: 63706"><p>That doesn&#039;t suck. It is absolutely unacceptable. As for Austrailia, do you think it was worth the $260 billion to have 18,000 fewer deaths (based on California&#039;s numbers, since they have a similar population size) in a category of people who are likely to die within the next few years anyway? I don&#039;t know about you, but $7.7 million per person per year to extend 18,000 peoples lives a couple of years, seems like money better spent elsewhere. That&#039;s only counting the budget shortfall their response created for Australia, plus the projected shrinking of GDP over the next year. That&#039;s not counting the actual expenditures of their response. Nor is it counting the costs to individuals affected by the response through job loss and business closure, nor any other of the terrible problems that will spring up from the fall out. How many extra suicides? How many other illnesses left untreated due to inaccessibility of healthcare? The list goes on. To say Australia got it right just because they took action and their numbers look good is to deny the 99% of the rest of the picture. How people who think like that can manage to function in the real world at all is baffling to me.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="zubenelgenubi, post: 4679108, member: 63706"] That doesn't suck. It is absolutely unacceptable. As for Austrailia, do you think it was worth the $260 billion to have 18,000 fewer deaths (based on California's numbers, since they have a similar population size) in a category of people who are likely to die within the next few years anyway? I don't know about you, but $7.7 million per person per year to extend 18,000 peoples lives a couple of years, seems like money better spent elsewhere. That's only counting the budget shortfall their response created for Australia, plus the projected shrinking of GDP over the next year. That's not counting the actual expenditures of their response. Nor is it counting the costs to individuals affected by the response through job loss and business closure, nor any other of the terrible problems that will spring up from the fall out. How many extra suicides? How many other illnesses left untreated due to inaccessibility of healthcare? The list goes on. To say Australia got it right just because they took action and their numbers look good is to deny the 99% of the rest of the picture. How people who think like that can manage to function in the real world at all is baffling to me. [/QUOTE]

Verification