|
|
 Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
That's a weak argument, and I'm not taking the bait.
You could argue that by hoarding now, she wont have to leave later when social distancing is really needed.
Then we're back to the assertion that it's not her moral right to act in her best interests as she sees fit.
Again... it's TP.
If you want to change the topic to ventilators or something with immediate life and death consequences, then my opinions change.
So long as we're talking about some people hoarding TP, which is in fact in plentiful supply, then I really don't care what people do.
Publicly shaming someone over such trivialities is probably not what's best for society as a whole, IMO.
That ends us living in a world where it's illegal to have a no pants party, and no one wants that world.
Nope. 20 families could have sheltered in place for weeks with that amount of TP. That amount of TP simply doesn't match up with any timeframe given related to the virus.
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
Did you answer your own question, there?
Yep 
Anyways, I think you have a hang up on individual freedoms. We currently have a balance between individualism and collectivism, and generally everyone is happy with it. Yet when the idea that the balance may be wrongly favoring individualism too much, everyone acts as if the proposed increase in collectivism is evil, ignoring that they are perfectly happy with the collectivism currently in place.
Another way to look at it is to take individual freedoms to the extreme. Game it out and watch the world crumble. As with most everything, it's a balancing act. It plays out as individualism vs collectivism, but the real game is finding the sweet spot on the spectrum.
|
Reply With Quote