THE IDEA that Americans grappling with the coronavirus pandemic face a stark choice between reigniting the economy and hunkering down to save lives is increasingly posed as a brutal question: Why destroy the world as we know it to save some retirees? Or, as some have reframed it even more barbarically: Why not sacrifice a finite number of vulnerable, mainly elderly people, well past their prime, for the greater good of reviving a thriving economy?
Here’s why not: It’s a phony choice, based on a false premise.
President Trump has not quite defined the dilemma in those terms, though he edged close by warning Americans not to “let the cure be worse than the problem.” Some of his acolytes have chosen their words less delicately, notably Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick of Texas, a Republican about to turn 70, who said he and other senior citizens are “willing to take a chance on [our] survival” to help return to normal daily life. “And if that is the exchange,” said Mr. Patrick, “I’m all in.” Continue reading.