zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. hogFea+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-03-30 20:03:02
Yes, everyone will be exposed to the virus.

As I specifically mentioned: this is going to last for a year (probably more). Everyone is going to have to learn how to continue doing their job with that.

There is no other option: the govt doesn't have enough money, business doesn't have enough money, consumers don't have enough money...everyone is going to have to do their job with this happening.

replies(1): >>saagar+y
2. saagar+y[view] [source] 2020-03-30 20:07:07
>>hogFea+(OP)
> Yes, everyone will be exposed to the virus.

Not equally. You can't possibly be saying that someone who is able to completely self-isolate by working at home is in the same position as the person who is out grabbing groceries?

replies(1): >>hogFea+16
◧◩
3. hogFea+16[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-03-30 20:42:38
>>saagar+y
I am sure it must be a great luxury to have the choice of being able to "completely self-isolate"...but that is not going to cover the majority of the population and even those who do are not going to be able to do that for a year. It just isn't rational.
replies(1): >>munk-a+V8
◧◩◪
4. munk-a+V8[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-03-30 21:04:46
>>hogFea+16
As a result of our enjoyment of this luxury I think it's perfectly rationale that the market responds by increasing compensation for these jobs that don't have that luxury and maybe correct the insane wage disparity between folks that need to continue doing manual labour and all of those that can work through our computers alone.

As a bonus, we might just start addressing the extreme and ridiculous levels of wealth inequality we have in society today through that process.

[go to top]