Social Distancing: Because the Needs of the Many Outweigh the Needs of the Few

View Comments

• Hi, Michelle. I'm glad Mr. Spock didn't share your values.

  Yes, the point of the many staying at home is indeed to reduce the spread of the virus so that our most vulnerable members of the population will be less likely to die. Most of us will probably still get the virus, but the point of staying home is to slow down the spread, so that hospitals aren't overwhelmed by a huge rush of sick people.

  Most people with COVID-19 will recover on their own, a small number will need a brief time in the ICU, and an even smaller number will die no matter what. If all the ICU beds are full of people getting their short-term care, then more people who need that short-term care won't get it, and they will die. And if the ICU beds are all full of people with COVID-19, then people who are injured in car accidents, firefighters with smoke inhalation, police officers shot by bad guys, and and anyone else who might need an ICU won't get a bed.

  I'm sad that you see a "stay at home" plan as a loss of your rights. I'm sad that you don't see the sacrifice we are all making as very small when weighed against a preventable loss of life.

• You have that backwards the needs of the few (those that die from the virus the elderly and ones with compromised immune system) are outweighed by the needs of many. The majority is suppose to quarantine and stay in there homes and social distance and give up all there liberty and rights for the few. Instead why are we not taking extra measure to quarantine the few. Instead we are going to crash our economy and go into a world wide recession for the few. This makes not sense the needs of the many should out weight the needs of the few. The trade of thats happening is going to be more devastating and damaging for those who survive "the many" or as the CDC put it "MOST" WILL RECOVER.

  • The German National Socialist Party espoused the same philosophy as you do. You must be very proud.