The Coronavirus has brought a new reality in how we live. The lockdowns, containment tiers, mask mandates, and social distancing restrictions imposed on society have people fooled into a basic game of hid the pea under the walnut – for the young at heart, an X-Box computer game. Guess which walnut the Coronavirus is hidden under?
But is this game being played without the player realizing that they are looking into a mirror that confuses the walnut selection with a potential wrong outcome? The dilemma is to focus on the perceived outcome of saving either:
“the protecting the lives of the elderly with a moral compass … or … the economic stability of the economy and national health services, where ever you may live.”
In other words, the moral structure of basic human life saves the elderly at the economic expense of workers and the young population. This creates a huge economic cost and purchasing power to the very largest segment of society by design. The working class and young are morally obliged to forfeit their long life opportunities, development, societal progress of decades for the tiny, reduced, and guaranteed short-lived future of the elderly. In the future, will a change in this moral compass occur, brought on by the Coronavirus “pandemic?” According to a new survey, three-quarters of Americans now agree that the Coronavirus “pandemic” is a sign the U.S. should adopt a universal health care system. This indicates that society, at this point, does want to pay this price. But will this always be true?
Everyone is concerned about possible infections and deaths that can occur with the Coronavirus, but the health stakes are highest for older adults. Normal aging of the immune system and underlying medical conditions make people 60 years old and up more vulnerable to COVID-19. It is clear that the older one is, the more susceptible one is to Coronavirus death.
In terms of healthcare costs, researchers have aimed at a common complaint about health care spending, especially publicly funded Medicare: that one-quarter of it is spent on patients in their last year of life. While that assertion is true, the researchers say that it ignores the fact that in more than 9 in 10 cases, the patients were not expected to die in that short a time span. A simple review of the data shows that most healthcare costs in society go to the elderly – a moral contract to the elderly. After all, we will be elderly one day.
But this moral contract with the elderly is being challenged due to the Coronavirus “pandemic.” With each successive incarnation of the Coronavirus “pandemic,” governments have perhaps unintentionally (or not) focused on the elderly – asking the rest of the society to expend large amounts of resources and give up their liberties on their behalf. But someone has to pay the rent. Can the rest of society continue this Coronavirus debt spiral, via endless economic aid and economic stimulus – until default or a frightful currency debasement that would collapse the whole economic system? Not to even speak of a never to return to pre-Coronavirus lifestyles.
The psyche of pandemics has now become part of our cultural vernacular. Governments and the healthcare industry has seen to this. What pandemic comes after COVID-19? Given the fact that the Coronavirus will kill only 0.08% of the population in the U.S., the irrationality of people’s fears and government policy will be to send the economy into a death spiral to prevent these deaths. Can you imagine what we do if the death rates were even 1 to 2%?
But timing is critical. Perhaps governments are engaged in a cynical plan to use the young and the working class’s internal moral compass to sacrifice on behalf of the elderly, which is designed to overload the economic system. In the battle with the Coronavirus, governments will be providing the working class a drip of wage replacement and economic assistance packages for a sufficient time until business fails. Then there will be no other alternative, with public dependence on the government, but to reduce the drip that starves the patient – the elderly. Our moral compasses will be challenged – to defend the elderly or not.
One thing is for sure, governments and some nefarious business elements will try to manipulate and make that moral decision for you to seize power and the wealth that comes with this. This may make a very dark future for our global society. How long before this change is the key. If society takes too long before changing this, having a viable economy may not be possible. Perhaps it would have been better to let nature take its course, rather than having governments meddle in nature’s affairs. Let’s hope that society chooses the right pea under the walnut.
Where does your moral compass lie?
Editors note: Op-Ed submitted to the Right Wire Report by an Australian reader, a globe-trotting avid private investment advisor.