• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who should we save first from the coronavirus?

Bucky

Bucky

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
28,570
Reaction score
6,361
Location
Washington
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Given that we do not have enough resources to medically treat a massive number of people in the hospital from coronavirus, who should be given priority on treatment? Shouldn't it be the people that have the best chance at survival?

Decisions will need to be made.
 
Bucky said:
Given that we do not have enough resources to medically treat a massive number of people in the hospital from coronavirus, who should be given priority on treatment? Shouldn't it be the people that have the best chance at survival?

Decisions will need to be made.
Click to expand...

Just shooting people over, say, 71 displaying symptoms solves the problem. 71 is not an arbitrary age, either. I'm 70, so my proposal makes perfect sense. Yeah, yeah. Some of you are going to suggest 69 as the cut off. You know nothing. Less than nothing. You owe humanity a debt you can never repay.
 
Bucky said:
who should be given priority on treatment?
Shouldn't it be the people that have the best chance at survival?
Click to expand...

As opposed to what? What do you think is the standard operating procedure now?
 
Bucky said:
Given that we do not have enough resources to medically treat a massive number of people in the hospital from coronavirus, who should be given priority on treatment? Shouldn't it be the people that have the best chance at survival?

Decisions will need to be made.
Click to expand...

But a recent president told us that under his free for all medical program such choices would never have to be made.
 
Bucky said:
Given that we do not have enough resources to medically treat a massive number of people in the hospital from coronavirus, who should be given priority on treatment? Shouldn't it be the people that have the best chance at survival?

Decisions will need to be made.
Click to expand...

I answer with this video:



:peace
 
Bucky said:
Given that we do not have enough resources to medically treat a massive number of people in the hospital from coronavirus, who should be given priority on treatment? Shouldn't it be the people that have the best chance at survival?

Decisions will need to be made.
Click to expand...

Save Tom Brady.
 
Bucky said:
Given that we do not have enough resources to medically treat a massive number of people in the hospital from coronavirus, who should be given priority on treatment? Shouldn't it be the people that have the best chance at survival?

Decisions will need to be made.
Click to expand...

Highest quality of life to be reasonably expected to be lived if we save them X number of years to be expected to be lived if we save them =



The highest numbers win.....those who claim that we need to spend as much effort saving the cripples as everyone else have taken leave of their senses.



Sorry, I understand well that this makes me a cruel bastard according to the Victim Culture Cult, but it is the right thing to do....our ancestors tended to be smart enough to figure these sorts of things out....why is it so hard for us?
 
Last edited:
Bucky said:
Given that we do not have enough resources to medically treat a massive number of people in the hospital from coronavirus, who should be given priority on treatment? Shouldn't it be the people that have the best chance at survival?

Decisions will need to be made.
Click to expand...

Now THIS is an excellent question, Trumpandemic or no Trumpandemic.

Society first and foremost needs to embrace the right of any unencumbered individual to peacefully and painlessly end their life.

Do that, and a great deal falls into place behind.

This topic, in a larger context, is the most important in all of philosophy.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Highest quality of life to be reasonably expected to be lived if we save them X number of years to be expected to be lived if we save them =

The highest numbers win.....those who claim that we need to spend as much effort saving the cripples as everyone else have taken leave of their senses.

Sorry, I understand well that this makes me a cruel bastard according to the Victim Culture Cult, but it is the right thing to do....our ancestors tended to be smart enough to figure these sorts of things out....why is it so hard for us?
Click to expand...

You're suggesting we proceed on an entirely arbitrary basis.

One could just as easily say "Save the dog lovers & kill the cat people," or vice versa.
 
Fantastic thread & great little sub-sub-forum, btw.
 
3leftsdoo said:
You're suggesting we proceed on an entirely arbitrary basis.

One could just as easily say "Save the dog lovers & kill the cat people," or vice versa.
Click to expand...

That's ridiculous.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
That's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Of course.

Any arbitrary measure of worth is ridiculous by definition.

Quality of life = Arbitrary

Numbers of years extending said alleged quality = Arbitrary
 
3leftsdoo said:
Of course.

Any arbitrary measure of worth is ridiculous by definition.

Quality of life = Arbitrary

Numbers of years extending said alleged quality = Arbitrary
Click to expand...

Its warrior decision making in battle...the best we can do....so it will have to be good enough for you.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Its warrior decision making in battle...the best we can do....so it will have to be good enough for you.
Click to expand...

It's completely arbitrary; a cascade of arbitrary ideas.

Thus I reject it.
 
We should save nobody,

Revert back to survival of the fittest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom