Like Tree146Likes

March 2022 - China Covid Cases

Reply
Page 12 of 19 FirstFirst ... 4 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... LastLast
  1. #111

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,645
    Quote Originally Posted by AsianXpat0:
    Sorry, while I do appreciate realism in policymaking and appreciation for individual rights, you are going way too far here in seeming to potentially celebrate mass casualties. I don’t think contemplating 3m of any group of people, old or otherwise, dying, is anything but horrific, and frankly I’m appalled.

    Hoping this is just you acting out because our free agency has been removed by the overintrusive state with screwed up policies and you can repudiate that sentiment in some shape or form, but obviously it’s your choice whether or not you want to be thought of as possessing some level of decency over and above just being able to reason from facts.

    Anyway point was they look to be preparing to minimise casualties in case it gets out of hand, not that they look to be truly “living with Covid”. Still have to wait for them to shift communications and/or massively vaccinate the elderly before any of that.
    There's many answers to your comment, none of them black or white.

    Firstly it was written in the 3rd person from the perspective of the CCFuckingP.

    Covid kills those who are the biggest economic burden on society and China has an ageing issue - As does most of the developed world.

    Q1:
    What is China's main solution to the ageing problem (actually to the money problem of paying for the elderly)?


    Q2: So would the jackboots benefit from elderly deaths if they stayed in power?

    Q3:
    Now @AsianXpat0, do you think the world has exactly the right number of people currently, or does it have too many or too little? (I'd appreciate a straight non-ambiguous answer to this question)


    Q4: What is the ONLY mechanism for population decrease?

    Note: Death is not only absolutely guaranteed for everyone, it's absolutely essential for all life and almost certainly for all other sentient life, the most vital deaths of all are those of humans.

    Q5: Is it tragic for an individual and their family when someone dies?

    Q6: Is it tragic for a society when someone dies?

    Q7: Is it tragic for the planet when someone dies?

    Q8: Is it tragic for you when someone dies?

    Q9: How many people die per annum on the planet? What percentage is 3m of that?

    Q10: What lessons will china learn if 3m people die of covid?

    Q11: What if it's 300m?

    Looking forward to your reply.


    Postscript: I know what horrific is and it ain't elderly people dying of covid.

  2. #112

    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    4,504
    Quote Originally Posted by Sage:
    There's many answers to your comment, none of them black or white.

    Firstly it was written in the 3rd person from the perspective of the CCFuckingP.

    Covid kills those who are the biggest economic burden on society and China has an ageing issue - As does most of the developed world.

    Q1:
    What is China's main solution to the ageing problem (actually to the money problem of paying for the elderly)?


    Q2: So would the jackboots benefit from elderly deaths if they stayed in power?

    Q3:
    Now @AsianXpat0, do you think the world has exactly the right number of people currently, or does it have too many or too little? (I'd appreciate a straight non-ambiguous answer to this question)


    Q4: What is the ONLY mechanism for population decrease?

    Note: Death is not only absolutely guaranteed for everyone, it's absolutely essential for all life and almost certainly for all other sentient life, the most vital deaths of all are those of humans.

    Q5: Is it tragic for an individual and their family when someone dies?

    Q6: Is it tragic for a society when someone dies?

    Q7: Is it tragic for the planet when someone dies?

    Q8: Is it tragic for you when someone dies?

    Q9: How many people die per annum on the planet? What percentage is 3m of that?

    Q10: What lessons will china learn if 3m people die of covid?

    Q11: What if it's 300m?

    Looking forward to your reply.


    Postscript: I know what horrific is and it ain't elderly people dying of covid.
    On Q1 and Q2, I am not going to accuse China’s leadership from profiting from death. In any event, I believe families rather than the state are supposed to shoulder the responsibility for care of the elderly.

    On Q3, please excuse me when I make the observation that mentioning somebody when you have already quoted their text in reply can come across as a little condescending.

    As to the question itself, my frank answer is I do not know. This isn’t because I’m avoiding answering, or that I think the answer would be distasteful, or unpopular (you’ve already seen me weather that often enough), just because I don’t consider myself sufficiently informed on that topic to make a judgment. If you push me I would say I’m not Malthusian in the absence of more information (and please don’t then shove lots of it at me, my original point stands regardless how “right” your conclusion is).

    On Q4-11, I think it is far easier to sum up my comment as, life is indeed a cycle than eventually ends in death. Man’s journey through time is a confrontation with the inevitability of his passing, and that it does not have to be regretted nor bemoaned. Your point is at sufficient scale, any individual tragedy becomes insignificant, and even mass tragedies can seem to fade into insignificance. Obviously anyone can appreciate this fact, but what you’re neglecting is we can’t be spending all our time on the zoomed out scale. Your contention appears to be death doesn’t matter, a certain population is the right one, and how we get there or how people die is not relevant. I profoundly disagree. When facing the Trolley problem, I would want someone in charge to be able to weigh the costs and benefits and make the right decision, but that someone has to pay a profound emotional cost. While I don’t want some gutless moron crying out some ethical defence for complete inaction, that doesn’t mean I would appreciate some robot megalomaniac at the controls either. We are built this way for a reason.

    I have been grateful for your support on matters of principle, and have not wanted to appear disloyal, but as in the past, that does not mean we agree on everything. I regret that you seem to think educating me is more important than appreciating my larger point here. Perhaps it is simply a way to diminish the importance of what you said as you do some level regret it, and if so I beseech you to quietly self-reflect, but if ultimately you still think you are right as to which is the more important point, we can simply agree to disagree. In either event I don’t believe my further reply to this is necessary.
    shri, ReleaseZeKraken, bdw and 1 others like this.

  3. #113

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    θ–„ζ‰Άζž—
    Posts
    42,799
    I beseech you to quietly self-reflect, but if ultimately you still think you are right as to which is the more important point, we can simply agree to disagree. In either event I don’t believe my further reply to this is necessary.
    Amen... I've learnt that there are a lot of people one should not engage with because outcomes are not likely to be positive for ones mental state. Unless you're professional internet master debater.
    Shiojiri Hiro likes this.

  4. #114

    Join Date
    May 2021
    Posts
    628

    Sharp, Crisp, accurate and unapologetic.. China virus, Ukraine war and much more.. Ironically, collective images/videos of China and related news are harder to find in HK media, #OC2S..


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=senI-C45reM


  5. #115

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,645
    Quote Originally Posted by AsianXpat0:
    On Q1 and Q2, I am not going to accuse China’s leadership from profiting from death. In any event, I believe families rather than the state are supposed to shoulder the responsibility for care of the elderly.

    On Q3, please excuse me when I make the observation that mentioning somebody when you have already quoted their text in reply can come across as a little condescending.

    As to the question itself, my frank answer is I do not know. This isn’t because I’m avoiding answering, or that I think the answer would be distasteful, or unpopular (you’ve already seen me weather that often enough), just because I don’t consider myself sufficiently informed on that topic to make a judgment. If you push me I would say I’m not Malthusian in the absence of more information (and please don’t then shove lots of it at me, my original point stands regardless how “right” your conclusion is).

    On Q4-11, I think it is far easier to sum up my comment as, life is indeed a cycle than eventually ends in death. Man’s journey through time is a confrontation with the inevitability of his passing, and that it does not have to be regretted nor bemoaned. Your point is at sufficient scale, any individual tragedy becomes insignificant, and even mass tragedies can seem to fade into insignificance. Obviously anyone can appreciate this fact, but what you’re neglecting is we can’t be spending all our time on the zoomed out scale. Your contention appears to be death doesn’t matter, a certain population is the right one, and how we get there or how people die is not relevant. I profoundly disagree. When facing the Trolley problem, I would want someone in charge to be able to weigh the costs and benefits and make the right decision, but that someone has to pay a profound emotional cost. While I don’t want some gutless moron crying out some ethical defence for complete inaction, that doesn’t mean I would appreciate some robot megalomaniac at the controls either. We are built this way for a reason.

    I have been grateful for your support on matters of principle, and have not wanted to appear disloyal, but as in the past, that does not mean we agree on everything. I regret that you seem to think educating me is more important than appreciating my larger point here. Perhaps it is simply a way to diminish the importance of what you said as you do some level regret it, and if so I beseech you to quietly self-reflect, but if ultimately you still think you are right as to which is the more important point, we can simply agree to disagree. In either event I don’t believe my further reply to this is necessary.
    The point is simple and contentious and you seem to have not wanted to confront it fully.

    The zoomed out scale is not the whole point at all, or even the main point.

    The real point is that Human death is not undesirable in most senses, and as long as people live mostly in the zoomed in state we will be storing up more problems than you are clearly willing to admit.

  6. #116

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tsuen Wan
    Posts
    836

    [QUOTE=shri;3859344]@mengfei - where are those numbers sourced from?

    The official numbers don't match with the ones you're linking to. Am I missing another obvious source for China Stats?

    Well here in the middle kingdom they can ONLY report what's coming out of the state media, maybe any small deviation is ok for them but never the Big picture

    https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=Mzk...CY&wx_header=3


  7. #117

  8. #118

    Looks like China is successful keeping Omicron at bay.


  9. #119

    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Faroe Islands
    Posts
    1,780

    The great motherland can do anything it set its mind and heart out to do


  10. #120

Reply
Page 12 of 19 FirstFirst ... 4 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... LastLast