So it's OK to just dismiss tens of thousands of deaths of those whom you deem to be "ready for the graveyard anyway?" Are the elderly and those with underlying diseases all expendable?
That's an extremely callous and dangerous position to take, IMHO. If we decide the lives of the old and infirm are of no consequence and we'll just thin the herd, what's next? Do we decide that the lives of certain other groups are of no consequence as well
What I meant was that 2017 was a bad year for the flu, worldwide. Here in the US about 60,000 died from it. Of course, in 2017, you sheltered at home for six months. You wore masks, gloves., when you went to the store. You did not visit nursing homes. Well, nobody did that stuff. There was nothing in the news about dying flu victims. Those 60,000 were about to drop off anyway. No one was going to do anything to stop the gross national product. In 2020, 120,000 virus deaths are predicted, and the world stops. My question has always been why in the hell didn't we worry about those 60,000 flu victims. And what is so special about virus victims? Even if you double the death rate of flu victims, it's not all that mathematically significant. Really, statistically what is another 60,000 out of 350,000,000? Why is it you don't care about flu victims, but you do virus victims? Why is you ignore flu vidtims, but shut down the economy for virus victims, when their numbers are mathematically similar? When I see the compassion for the families of virus victims, I wonder why none was shown for those flu victims?
there are already people in power out there who have made that very decision as shown by their actions.