who says its irrelevant for the future? some experts are saying the quarantine is going to be semi permanent in some form or another.

Yes, epidemiologists. Who tend to focus way too much on preventing infectious diseases, just like policepeople tend to focus way too much on public order, security experts tend to focus way too much on security, etc.

Not a chance. That is fascist and evil to deprive people of social interaction by government decree.

This past year might have felt breezy if you're in your sixties, or bearable if you're in your thirties - but if you're in your teens or younger you've been deprived of a lot of social development time and there will be long term damage from this.

Additionally - I don't know if it really is an irrelevant factor for the future. This is a flu variant that could continue to mutate and cause havoc if governments act irresponsibly or if a particularly large segment of the population continues to resist vaccination and mask wearing while being egged on by idiots on TV. Lastly, global habitat destruction increases the chances we discover fun new world ending diseases, hopefully we won't see another one for decades, but it's unlikely that we'll be spared another global pandemic for the next 100 years.

It is for this reason I consider “zoomers” as an appropriate label for the Gen Z kids.

But here is something else I also know: the modern way in which kids develop through the teenage years is already screwed up, even without the internet, smart phones, and social media. It seems normal now because it is normative.

> but if you're in your teens or younger you've been deprived of a lot of social development time and there will be long term damage from this.

Exactly. So let's not make it worse by making children communicate through devices without even a flimsy justification.