treebirg

But I do know what numbers are. I've also done addition before, so I know what the steps are. The result of 51 + 92 is derivative from (at least) these two concepts, which derive from others and so on. Maybe I'm stretching the meaning of derivative here, but to me derivative doesn't mean strictly recalling something verbatim.

> Why were we willing to let these people die in 2019 and earlier?

This is implying that the situation pre-2020 was the same as it was during the pandemic. Is the argument really "it's just the flu"?

> It's unfortunate that immunocompromised people are vulnerable but it's not something we can fully control in society.

Indeed, it's not something we can fully control, hence we do our best.

Ultimately, my comment was in response to the idea that people who are worried should simply isolate. I gave an example of why that's fallacious. You can argue all you want about how victims are inevitable, how covid is now endemic, etc., but then say it as it is: "I don't care for the lives of the vulnerable". That would be a more factual and sincere statement.

There are plenty of immunocompromised people of working age for whom vaccines simply do not work, and who cannot work from home due to the nature of their work. These people can't isolate, even if they're worried.

Ignoring the abhorrent – yet apparently acceptable to you – idea that these people should be left to die (due to what I can only guess is some sort of naive ideation of a "survival of the fittest" concept), these people dying and being hospitalized will certainly have a negative effect on the health system and economy. While their lives may not be of interest to you, surely you can appreciate the risk of a fragile economy.