Madison, WI Nazi Style Crackdown...

[Drummond]

I'm willing to bet the minute you or a loved one gets put on a ventilator your tune changes.

Charming.

What leads you to this conclusion ?

Do you even understand adherence to high principle ?

I'm not going to speculate on what the reaction to your fictitious scenario would've been. It's not my place to do so. Neither is it yours.

Or if deaths start reaching into the hundreds of thousands or more. Yay, the US will be destroyed

Do I need to comment ?

Your hostility to a truly great country is absolutely disgusting. And .. in your case of course, it's a case of 'biting the hand that feeds you'.

You admit you approve of a destroyed US ? Involving HOW MUCH suffering, death and destruction, Pete, h'mm ?

Are you OK with all that ? Where's your humanity ?

Does it even exist ?

but hey, in your fucked up head, you're totally free. woohoo, winning! The gov wouldn't have to issue edicts if you ass hats would self quarantine and social distance.

Americans are free to make their mistakes. We all are.

My one concern is where one particular mistake will lead us.

I have that concern partly because I care about my own life, but also on purely humanitarian grounds.

But YOU, Pete, can never be accused of humanitarianism. Cheering on the destruction of your own country is as disgustingly despicable as it gets.

You really are one utterly foul little turd, aren't you, Pete ?

[Drummond]

Quite frankly? Fuck yourself. And go ahead and demand an apology for something. Your smugness isn't something I would apologize for. I tried to avoid telling you what a complete dick you're being, but you simply reply with how great you are and I can't understand. And I laugh and move to the next post. Laughter is the best medicine. And yeah yeah "I'll be alive at least", so be it. And why? Because you are so so much smarter than I am. Thinning of the herd to an extent if you will. Perhaps all the stupid people will be gone and the collective IQ will skyrocket and make us that much more better of a country. So not only am I enjoying my freedoms, but contributing to the future success of America.

Folks so intelligent such as yourself, it's got to be tiring after awhile. Me? Not so much. I just go outside with no care in the world, if I die and bring someone with me, so be it. It's much easier living life when you're of the lower IQ segment of society. Not only less thinking and therefore less struggling, but sometimes my stupidity then gets the government for some odd reason to start helping me out.

I need remedial courses. I'm gonna join in the fall, perhaps my local community college. I ain't too bright, as you know of course. Perhaps they can catch me up with the ever changing history documents. Sure is a devil of a time to keep up when history is continually rewritten.

While an apology will not be forthcoming, perhaps you'll make do with me bowing down to your superiority and acknowledging you are the supreme winner of DP thread #275,291. But such superiority demands more. Not just acknowledge how you are not only right, but RIGHT, and with such ultimate intelligence and superiority, it only makes sense that you're the winner of every single thread you participate in!!

So while looking to figure out how to insert thy willy in thyself, I will embarrassingly walk away from this thread as the loser I am. As the dumber one. A dead man on the horizon, dead man walking as they say.

Good debate involves a swapping of ideas, of perspectives. Debate proves or disproves their worth. It's a good, logical, dispassionate (ideally so, though far from always) process. It can be highly constructive.

But all this is, Jim, is a rant. An emotional response, largely devoid of logical debating points.

I think you know you're wrong, but you just won't admit it. Pride, & all that, but not to forget a certain respectworthy patriotism and belief in your country's values ... which unfortunately doesn't include adaptation to changing conditions.

Let me ask you about this ...

but you simply reply with how great you are and I can't understand.

Fine. Point me to just ONE example of where I've ever said 'how great I am'. I say I've done nothing of the kind. If you think I have, you've imagined it ... unless, you prove me wrong.

Have at it.

I don't think it's that you can't understand. I think it's that you choose not to. You're seeing what you choose to see.

Try disproving my point of view from a good debating method. Show me the superiority (since this matters so much to you) of your own thinking, and how the Georgian governor's recklessness is a good thing, worthy of praise.

Better that, Jim, than a rant.

Or, just ignore my challenge .. because you can't meet it. Not meeting it has nothing to do with superiority or inferiority, just a loyalty to a position you cannot represent to the point of winning out from it.

It's OK. I get it.

Best wishes.

[jimnyc]

Good debate involves a swapping of ideas, of perspectives.

Understood.

Good debate does NOT have someone DECLARE they are instantly correct. That the opponent knows it and for some reason is ignoring it. And then outright stating that the person may not even comprehend.

Sorry, but in my world, that's not the beginning of a good debate. That's the beginning of someone simply declaring their argument to be superior in advance, and someone rudely stating the other can't comprehend.

That is not debating. That is not swapping ideas. That is not discussing perspectives. It isn't even a form of debating. It's nothing more than someone declaring themselves to know more than the other and to belittle the other at the same time with the comprehension mention in there.

It was demeaning and disrespectful. Nothing more and nothing less. I bowed out before I even bowed out publicly. Not my cup of tea, if you will. And rather than creating a feud of some sort over increasing capitalization and bold letters and declarations of intelligence, I laughed on the side and ignored it. Until you again started in with the disrespect, so I then got pissy.

In my honest opinion, it's not a good trait of someone that always declares being correct, or has the desire to instantly bring someone down with comments such as comprehension, and then ignores that and acts like it didn't happen before my very eyes. If someone such as yourself truly had a desire to discuss things, even debate things, you sure have a strange way of showing it. My opinion, declare it incorrect and yourself correct, it matters not to me when I won't even entertain a full discussion when someone does such.

[Black Diamond]

I'm willing to bet the minute you or a loved one gets put on a ventilator your tune changes. Or if deaths start reaching into the hundreds of thousands or more. Yay, the US will be destroyed, but hey, in your fucked up head, you're totally free. woohoo, winning! The gov wouldn't have to issue edicts if you ass hats would self quarantine and social distance.

Ahh if it were your loved one you wouldn't think that way.

Same weak argument is brought up every time we go to war. Really is a dick move but I am not surprised you went there.

[Abbey Marie]

In honor of all the Pennsylvanians I just saw walking in the park without masks.


F6162648-F7F9-4D03-8DD4-0968ADC50630.jpeg

[Drummond]

This post highlights the difference. Our government is by the people, not the other way around. It was the great difference those old, dead guys created with that piece of parchment. We don't follow the government, it follows the people.

Sounds great. But, still, I see from your system what I also see from mine, at election time. Namely, electioneering.

Each side says what it represents. Speeches are given, describing manifesto commitments. Each side says what it WILL do if only you'll vote for them. You follow one side or the other.

Is there any reverse process, in your system, where if a disapproving crowd being lectured to can have their say, and by the time the candidate next appears, he reflects all the changes his disapproving crowd said they wanted instituted ?

Admittedly, there's no such process in my system (& especially from the Left !!). Is there one, in yours ? Please tell me about it.

It's a Republic, for the simple reason that most of us do not have the time or interest to vote on every single thing that a government needs to address-we vote for the representative to vote for our interest, not on issues. We do so for a term, not willy nilly when we just get pissed at them. At least until the Democrats and Trump, but we'll see how that turns out.

So ... where's the accountability, other than the freedom to vote out a Government you don't like ? That's just what we have here.

Explain it. What am I missing here ?

Truth is, your system seems quite silly to many. Boom, PM is out. Boom, he swayed some votes to stay. Boom, another election. Settled. Whoops, nope no coalition, another vote. Date Changes. Ok then, boom. PM stays.

No thanks.

I'm glad you enjoy yours. We do ours.

Do I enjoy mine ?? Sometimes mine is aggravating in the extreme. That dysfunctionality last year, over Brexit, showed my system in its worst light. Yes. We were nothing short of pathetic.

I can only say that, when it DOES work, it works well. It currently is, even given today's 'virtual' Parliament, where most MP's discuss, question, etc via Internet video link (our MP's are as intent upon observing lockdown rules as everybody else needs to be).

Yours .. I'm not sure I'm qualified to comment on (.. how INFERIOR of me, eh, Jim ?). But pettiness does sometimes seem to be the order of the day, from Trump's Twitter sideswipes, to Pelosi ripping up a speech in highly theatrical manner.

It may well be that your system of Government is highly superior (aargh, there's that word !!) to my own. But it does have an Achilles heel to it. Namely, adaptability to real-time events.

Your Georgian governor threatens the United States. Ideally, your Government would step in, and stop him. But, it isn't, and it won't.

I hope (unlike Pete, who will probably enjoy it all, but he IS a Leftie) that the death toll suffered by The People won't be too great (indeed, one extra unnecessary death is one too many).

Good luck with dreams of UK coming out on top of US though, will not happen.

I don't see it that way. I want the US to adopt realism. Then, differences may be meaningless.

[SassyLady]

And to hell with a certain Georgian Governor who'll happily threaten us all, with his - dogmatic - recklessness.

Interesting facts leading to logical conclusion that it's ok to reopen.

Rt does not get talked about a lot. It is the measure of a virus’s ability to reproduce. If Rt is above 1, the virus will spread. If it is below 1, the virus will stop spreading. Healthcare experts have been telling us since March that people needed to shelter-in-place to get Rt below 1. Once it was below one, we could start slowly reopening.
In Georgia, the state is below one. Not only that, but daily new cases continue to fall. Here are the present numbers in Georgia based on daily new cases:
• April 14: 830
• April 15: 634
• April 16: 661
• April 17: 537
• April 18: 256
• April 19: 157
• April 20: 96
• April 21: 23

America needs to reopen and get back to business.
It doesn’t need to happen all at once, but the gradual, phased, and responsible reopening pushed by Governors like Brian Kemp will put Americans back to work and avoid a second Great Depression.

https://renewedright.com/dr-fauci-sa...ou-speechless/

[Drummond]

Understood.

Good debate does NOT have someone DECLARE they are instantly correct. That the opponent knows it and for some reason is ignoring it. And then outright stating that the person may not even comprehend.

Granted, it's not a great tactic (if it's meant as one). But the answer's obvious ... the debating opponent proves his / her opposition wrong !!

Good debate, if that happens, is preserved. In fact, it's been actively provoked into happening.

Sorry, but in my world, that's not the beginning of a good debate. That's the beginning of someone simply declaring their argument to be superior in advance, and someone rudely stating the other can't comprehend.

That's your interpretation. But my answer's the same. An opportunity is there to disprove your opponent's contentions. Why not take it ?

That is not debating. That is not swapping ideas. That is not discussing perspectives. It isn't even a form of debating. It's nothing more than someone declaring themselves to know more than the other and to belittle the other at the same time with the comprehension mention in there.

What was your rant, then ?

It was demeaning and disrespectful. Nothing more and nothing less. I bowed out before I even bowed out publicly. Not my cup of tea, if you will. And rather than creating a feud of some sort over increasing capitalization and bold letters and declarations of intelligence, I laughed on the side and ignored it. Until you again started in with the disrespect, so I then got pissy.

You bowed out, then you bowed right back in.

What you call getting 'pissy', I call a rant. It was emotionalism, as I said, devoid of debating points.

In my honest opinion, it's not a good trait of someone that always declares being correct, or has the desire to instantly bring someone down with comments such as comprehension, and then ignores that and acts like it didn't happen before my very eyes. If someone such as yourself truly had a desire to discuss things, even debate things, you sure have a strange way of showing it. My opinion, declare it incorrect and yourself correct, it matters not to me when I won't even entertain a full discussion when someone does such.

You mean, I can be provocative ?

Very simply, you choose to debate, or you don't. You choose to prove me wrong, or you don't. The challenge is perpetually there, no matter WHAT I post, for you to achieve precisely that at any time.

But if you don't, and if instead all I get is a rant / being 'pissy', and absolutely nothing else, least of all open-mindedness .... what good is any of that ?

If you think you're right, prove it to me.

There's my challenge.

I hope you don't duck it.

Up to you, of course.

[Drummond]

Interesting facts leading to logical conclusion that it's ok to reopen.

https://renewedright.com/dr-fauci-sa...ou-speechless/

I've seen the BBC regurgitate something remarkably similar. But I'm not sure I'm convinced.

Right at the opening days of the Wuhan outbreak, how many people did it take to spark off an entire pandemic ? Did the entire city of Wuhan simultaneously infect neighbouring cities, and in that way, the breakout was achieved ?

I think it safe to assume that the entire pandemic took off from a starting point of a very few people, perhaps even just one.

How many cases of Covid-19 does Georgia currently have ? More than a few ?

What happens if, say, two uninfected people spend time in an environment surrounded by infected people ?

One, just one, Georgian citizen manages to infect somebody from another State. That newly infected person boards a train, or worse, a plane. The plane lands in the UK.

A seven hour flight (or, it was when I travelled to New York, many years ago) is ample to infect a sizeable percentage of the passengers on board. They land. Even if our people at Heathrow do their duty and do temperature tests (we've had anecdotal accounts of none being performed) ... there will be NO sign of infection after a mere seven hours. But, the infection is there, and then, it'll spread to other Londoners. Or any others, with their own travel plans ..

There is one flaw in my argument, though. We in the UK are not nearly as irresponsible as your Governor. We - currently - are in full lockdown. That might change in the weeks ahead. But, right now, it's fully in place, ordered by a responsible Government, doing the right thing, and workers and businesses, obeying, and doing the right thing. Consequently .. there's no passenger air traffic going to Heathrow.

For as long as that's true, we'll hopefully be shielded from the Governor's insane edict.

But your people will not be, not least because your Government hasn't intervened.

I fervently hope that as few people die as possible.

[Kathianne]

I've seen the BBC regurgitate something remarkably similar. But I'm not sure I'm convinced.

Right at the opening days of the Wuhan outbreak, how many people did it take to spark off an entire pandemic ? Did the entire city of Wuhan simultaneously infect neighbouring cities, and in that way, the breakout was achieved ?

I think it safe to assume that the entire pandemic took off from a starting point of a very few people, perhaps even just one.

How many cases of Covid-19 does Georgia currently have ? More than a few ?

What happens if, say, two uninfected people spend time in an environment surrounded by infected people ?

One, just one, Georgian citizen manages to infect somebody from another State. That newly infected person boards a train, or worse, a plane. The plane lands in the UK.

A seven hour flight (or, it was when I travelled to New York, many years ago) is ample to infect a sizeable percentage of the passengers on board. They land. Even if our people at Heathrow do their duty and do temperature tests (we've had anecdotal accounts of none being performed) ... there will be NO sign of infection after a mere seven hours. But, the infection is there, and then, it'll spread to other Londoners. Or any others, with their own travel plans ..

There is one flaw in my argument, though. We in the UK are not nearly as irresponsible as your Governor. We - currently - are in full lockdown. That might change in the weeks ahead. But, right now, it's fully in place, ordered by a responsible Government, doing the right thing, and workers and businesses, obeying, and doing the right thing. Consequently .. there's no passenger air traffic going to Heathrow.

For as long as that's true, we'll hopefully be shielded from the Governor's insane edict.

But your people will not be, not least because your Government hasn't intervened.

I fervently hope that as few people die as possible.

What you do not address, what if there is no vaccine? Then you have the same problem months or years from now, with less percentage that have some antibodies, regardless of how weak they may be. Or do you all stay hunkered down, hoping the rest of the world's survivors send you sustenance?

[Drummond]

What you do not address, what if there is no vaccine? Then you have the same problem months or years from now, with less percentage that have some antibodies, regardless of how weak they may be. Or do you all stay hunkered down, hoping the rest of the world's survivors send you sustenance?

Well .. after a very prolonged hunkering down, would we be in any fit state to pay (or meaningfully pay !) for the sustenance they send ?

Who'd be in a good enough shape, given the reality of the world you're describing, to send that sustenance, anyway ?

If there is no vaccine ... God help us. Or, God help you (from the Georgian Governor, or other comparatively reckless souls who help generate a needlesss spike, long before we 'need' one). God help us all, wherever and whoever we are.

The point is I can't properly address what I don't know about. Maybe there is no vaccine on the cards, which in the fullness of time, over years, will chronically threaten the very existence of most of the world's societies, as death rates massively eat into a society's very viabiity to operate and be whole.

But since we don't know that is true, we have to assume that we'll get one (Oxford duly pulling its finger out, Big Time ??). Of course, it'll take a time to produce all the number of doses required, and if your Georgian Governor successfully creates his second pandemic, the job of producing far greater numbers of doses will definitely take far longer. Not a help !!

[Kathianne]

Well .. after a very prolonged hunkering down, would we be in any fit state to pay (or meaningfully pay !) for the sustenance they send ?

My point exactly. You'd be physically shrunk and economically non-existent. No thanks.

Who'd be in a good enough shape, given the reality of the world you're describing, to send that sustenance, anyway ?

all of those about the .1 that didn't die. They'd be going along, with less customers, but less competition too.

If there is no vaccine ... God help us. Or, God help you (from the Georgian Governor, or other comparatively reckless souls who help generate a needlesss spike, long before we 'need' one). God help us all, wherever and whoever we are.

Wrong, you've become irrational. Look at Sweden, which chose wrong, imo, from the get go, but will recover with heavy hearts. Many more will not get sick, some mildly sick, some seriously sick and recover. Some will die. Few will die, but each one hurts.

The point is I can't properly address what I don't know about. Maybe there is no vaccine on the cards, which in the fullness of time, over years, will chronically threaten the very existence of most of the world's societies, as death rates massively eat into a society's very viabiity to operate and be whole.

But since we don't know that is true, we have to assume that we'll get one (Oxford duly pulling its finger out, Big Time ??). Of course, it'll take a time to produce all the number of doses required, and if your Georgian Governor successfully creates his second pandemic, the job of producing far greater numbers of doses will definitely take far longer. Not a help !!

Nope, you won't know what should be done until your government tells you what to do.

[Drummond]

My point exactly. You'd be physically shrunk and economically non-existent. No thanks.

Not sure I agree ... your conclusion is a harsh one. We'd be very significantly diminished, but ... non-existent ?

If Covid conditions continued for several years, and our hunkering down was still a feature of life, maybe. The longer the duration, the greater the damage, obviously. But (I'm not sure which) ours is the 5th or 6th strongest economy out there.

But try seeing this from the opposite end of the spectrum. We could emerge very quickly from lockdown, restart businesses. Hell, we could engineer our own pandemic, if we worked at it !! Businesses in full swing - but - with rapidly diminishing workforces.

A good or a bad outcome ?

It could be a survivable one, but through using a methodology no American would ever like. Simply, to maintain needed businesses, sections of the population could be retrained ... BY GOVERNMENT ORDER. Forget choosing your job, not if you were needed elsewhere. Freedom of choice becomes subservient to a State machinery needing to employ more draconan powers than we know at present, just to ensure the best survival possible.

The future of Covid-19 is not known, in any case. Will it mutate ? Will it become more deadly ? One thing is certain ... the longer it can survive, the greater its opportunity to mutate ! Prematurely emerging from lockdowns GIVES THE VIRUS A NEW LEASE OF LIFE.

So, those who do emerge early, might be helping that mutation along ... whereas, staying in lockdown and starving the virus, might just stop that from happening.

Of course, all this is conjecture. I do know just the one thing. Premature endings of lockdowns, does help the virus. Helps it to kill.

I've seen a headline from the BBC's Red Button service. It says - I quote:

US States partially reopen as virus deaths reach 50,000

The inference, to me, hints at a choice for which there is no rational explanation.

Reading the article, I note that Georgia is no longer alone. Oklahoma and Alaska are following suit.

Wonderful !! Just what we all need. Whoopee !!

... They'd be going along, with less customers, but less competition too. Wrong, you've become irrational. Look at Sweden, which chose wrong, imo, from the get go, but will recover with heavy hearts. Many more will not get sick, some mildly sick, some seriously sick and recover. Some will die. Few will die, but each one hurts.

Will deaths happening, happen uniformly, with uniform impact, across all industries and businesses ?

Will Covid mutate ? Will that new lease of life enable the mutation ? How can you possibly know that 'few will die' ?

Nope, you won't know what should be done until your government tells you what to do.

Here, you're correct. Reason: the Government follows scientific advice, and closely monitors events and trends. Its scientists are some of the best around. If policy changes, it'll be fully reactive to ongoing occurrences. It'll constitute the very best advice and informed direction we can have.

Laws will be passed, as necessary, to ensure social discipline.

OR ... we can have a population of lawbreakers.

We can have people saying, 'Yes, we know you've got your experts and your highly developed strategies, BUT, we don't care. Don't listen to them, what do the best scientific minds know ?'

Laws are passed, but not obeyed. Out of what ... sheer wanton ignorance ?

The police are run ragged, trying to enforce the law. Failing, perhaps because of their own falling numbers, anarchy breaks out.

People do what the hell they choose. The Government is either powerless, or, it calls in the Army to help keep order ... IF they, themselves, can.

Meanwhile, our entire population diminishes in size, as the virus has its field day.

For the sake of showing Government authority a lack of respect and obedience .. the social order breaks down, In the name 'of freedom'.

Happy days, eh, Kathianne ?

Luckily, all this comes out of my own imagination, for now. But not respecting Governmental authority, and the wisdom underpinning it, is a recipe for disaster.

... and ... we now have three rogue States to worry about.

Will your Government permit it ? If they do, how bad will things get ?

You tell me, Kath.

[Kathianne]

Not sure I agree ... your conclusion is a harsh one. We'd be very significantly diminished, but ... non-existent ?

If Covid conditions continued for several years, and our hunkering down was still a feature of life, maybe. The longer the duration, the greater the damage, obviously. But (I'm not sure which) ours is the 5th or 6th strongest economy out there.

But try seeing this from the opposite end of the spectrum. We could emerge very quickly from lockdown, restart businesses. Hell, we could engineer our own pandemic, if we worked at it !! Businesses in full swing - but - with rapidly diminishing workforces.

A good or a bad outcome ?

It could be a survivable one, but through using a methodology no American would ever like. Simply, to maintain needed businesses, sections of the population could be retrained ... BY GOVERNMENT ORDER. Forget choosing your job, not if you were needed elsewhere. Freedom of choice becomes subservient to a State machinery needing to employ more draconan powers than we know at present, just to ensure the best survival possible.

The future of Covid-19 is not known, in any case. Will it mutate ? Will it become more deadly ? One thing is certain ... the longer it can survive, the greater its opportunity to mutate ! Prematurely emerging from lockdowns GIVES THE VIRUS A NEW LEASE OF LIFE.

So, those who do emerge early, might be helping that mutation along ... whereas, staying in lockdown and starving the virus, might just stop that from happening.

Of course, all this is conjecture. I do know just the one thing. Premature endings of lockdowns, does help the virus. Helps it to kill.

I've seen a headline from the BBC's Red Button service. It says - I quote:



The inference, to me, hints at a choice for which there is no rational explanation.

Reading the article, I note that Georgia is no longer alone. Oklahoma and Alaska are following suit.

Wonderful !! Just what we all need. Whoopee !!



Will deaths happening, happen uniformly, with uniform impact, across all industries and businesses ?

Will Covid mutate ? Will that new lease of life enable the mutation ? How can you possibly know that 'few will die' ?



Here, you're correct. Reason: the Government follows scientific advice, and closely monitors events and trends. Its scientists are some of the best around. If policy changes, it'll be fully reactive to ongoing occurrences. It'll constitute the very best advice and informed direction we can have.

Laws will be passed, as necessary, to ensure social discipline.

OR ... we can have a population of lawbreakers.

We can have people saying, 'Yes, we know you've got your experts and your highly developed strategies, BUT, we don't care. Don't listen to them, what do the best scientific minds know ?'

Laws are passed, but not obeyed. Out of what ... sheer wanton ignorance ?

The police are run ragged, trying to enforce the law. Failing, perhaps because of their own falling numbers, anarchy breaks out.

People do what the hell they choose. The Government is either powerless, or, it calls in the Army to help keep order ... IF they, themselves, can.

Meanwhile, our entire population diminishes in size, as the virus has its field day.

For the sake of showing Government authority a lack of respect and obedience .. the social order breaks down, In the name 'of freedom'.

Happy days, eh, Kathianne ?

Luckily, all this comes out of my own imagination, for now. But not respecting Governmental authority, and the wisdom underpinning it, is a recipe for disaster.

... and ... we now have three rogue States to worry about.

Will your Government permit it ? If they do, how bad will things get ?

You tell me, Kath.

I’m on phone, start work soon.

After years or months of hunkering down while others adjust to opening and closing parts over and over, those just coming out will have little protection against a virus without vaccine.

I’ll look at the rest from home or during breaks, I truly suck at texting.

[Drummond]

I’m on phone, start work soon.

After years or months of hunkering down while others adjust to opening and closing parts over and over, those just coming out will have little protection against a virus without vaccine.

I’ll look at the rest from home or during breaks, I truly suck at texting.

I've got an answer for that ... I don't text at all. Never have. Never want to. I either put my laptop through its gruelling paces, or I don't type at all ...

You make a good point, so far as it goes. I can't help but concede it.

There's a problem, though, and it has to do with whether (a) the BBC has accurately reported, and (b) whether the WHO's advice should be fully heeded.

According to the BBC, the WHO advises that there's little reason to believe that those who've recovered from Covid-19 can be assumed to have an immunity from it.

If that's both accurate and true, people contracting Covid-19 may get it, then (hopefully) recover, but then, may recontract it, again and again !!

Would repeated illnesses wear away at the body's abilities to further survive ? Much as seas wear away coastlines, would Covid increasingly debilitate its survivors ?

People emerging from prolonged hunkerings would have none of that to contend with ... initially ......