Last week a Southern California lawyer named Scott McMillan started a Twitter firestorm when he urged saving the economy over protecting those who are “not productive” from the coronavirus.
As he said, “The fundamental problem is whether we are going to tank the entire economy to save 2.5 percent of the population which is (1) generally expensive to maintain, and (2) not productive.”
Gee, he sounds like my 70-year-old sister, Kellie, whose priorities in life begin with the stock market and her 401K. She’d rather be dead than have that fat investment account depleted a bit.
I’m guessing that there are quite a few folks out there who feel the same way, who are willing to sacrifice you, me, their parents, old Gramps and Nana…as long as their lifestyle isn’t interrupted. They’ve gotten used to ribeye steaks, and, Dammit!, they’re not going back to eating ground round. If a few million Americans need to die to make that happen, so be it.
For a moment, let’s contemplate The Great Depression, shall we?
When the American stock market collapsed, the cowards (i.e. the reckless speculators who caused the crash) jumped off tall buildings, and it was left to the common people to soldier on. Jobs were scarce, families had no savings, no income, and hardly anything to eat. My parents told me that it was pretty grim; that everyone had to tighten their belts.
What did they do when faced with adversity?
The American people hunkered down, “manned-up”, and survived…and they didn’t sacrifice whole portions of the population to give themselves more of the limited pie. They became stronger because of the national ordeal, and the economy eventually recovered. And, by the way, they won a World War and put a man on the Moon.
They call those ancestors of ours “The Greatest Generation”, and, we are the living testimonial to their intestinal fortitude.
Sure, America could use this opportunity to winnow out the old…and, while we’re at it, how about the poor, minorities, non-Christians, government bureaucrats, pointy-headed intellectuals, Democrats and lawyers?
We could do these things and, yes, there would be more N-95 masks, sterile gowns, ventilators, latex gloves, ICU beds, toilet paper and Purell to go around. More of our “productive” people could be saved, I guess.
But, then, how does one really judge who is more “productive” than someone else? Is a 20-year-old unemployed crack addict more deserving of a ventilator than a 70-year-old person who helps family members financially and emotionally?
(BTW, most people that I know would agree that lawyers like McMillan don’t add much to the “productivity” of the Nation. This point is driven home when you realize that a good portion of the members of Congress are lawyers. When was the last time Congress produced anything but spitball fights?
So, “I hereby make a motion that Lawyers be the first class of citizens who will be denied medical care during the Covid-19 crisis”. All in favor, say Aye. Motion approved by unanimous consent.”
Gee, that was easy. Now we have more ventilators to go around!)
I believe most people would agree that some jobs are more essential for for the economy than others. Certainly, jobs that produce food and hard goods, and professions that serve and protect (police, fire, military) are key to the well-being of the economy. We might call those “guns and butter”.
What about people who work in leisure industries? Certainly, Americans don’t need to go to the movies, golf, stay in fancy hotels, eat at restaurants, go to Disney World, etc. The employees who are employed in leisure industries work as hard as anyone, but is their “productivity” essential to America?
Consider, for example, if movie theaters vanished tomorrow, life in this Nation would go on. Do we really need that productivity? Do we need See’s candy or Cohiba cigars? Do we really need salesmen trying to get us to buy things we don’t really need for more than they’re worth?
My point is that a good portion of our economy involves activities that are simply “icing on the cake” of prosperity: nice, but not necessary. We could live without some of these things, like they did during The Great Depression. Back then, they were happy to share one potato for dinner. My Mom said she served my Dad tomato soup a lot: ketchup and water.
If “productivity” is simply defined as employment, essential or non-essential, then Senior Citizens who are retired are non-productive. And, as lawyer McMillan says, they are more expensive to maintain, from a health standpoint. So, good riddance to them!
However, I would point out that this targeted group has a few positive qualities: (1) People over 65 own a disproportionate share of the net worth of the country; (2) The wisdom of citizens over the age of 65 is highly valued; and, (3) They are the elders of the family unit, passing down tradition and values through the generations.
Tell me: what is more essential to you: See’s candy or your Grandpa Joe?
The remaining candidates for President of the United States in 2020 (as of today: Trump, Biden, and Sanders) are all over 70 years of age. Should they be denied a ventilator? How about all of those other silver-haired Cabinet members who help run our government? How about Warren Buffet, age 89, widely considered to be the smartest investor in the world? Should he be put down in favor of that knucklehead who partied at Spring Break in Florida with thousands of others last week, daring Covid-19 to infect him?
Yes, older Americans are more expensive to maintain, health-wise, but they’ve paid their dues: they built the country, and their descendants owe them the respect that they’ve earned. Someone in lawyer McMillan’s life helped him grow into adulthood, attend law school, and become a productive member of society. So, there’s a debt owed to one’s forbearers, I would think.
The “productivity” issue reminds me of a good friend named Fred “Curly” Morrison. He was an NFL player back in the day when the professional football game was just getting off the ground…back when they had leather helmets. Anyway, he and his generation of players essentially founded the National Football League… through blood, sweat and tears. For all the punishment they absorbed, they were paid “peanuts”, and most were forced to work other jobs in the offseason just to support their families.
Fast forward a generation, and the NFL had turned into the money-making juggernaut it is today, with billionaire owners and players earning millions of dollar per year. While this gold rush was going on, the old NFL alumni were beginning to suffer all manner of maladies from concussions and joint injuries which left them hobbled and fuzzy-headed…because of their gladiatorial duties establishing the NFL, and the fact that the early league had no long-term care insurance.
Do you think that the NFL, which was now flush with cash, would glady assist their Senior Citizen founding fathers? Well, not exactly…guys like Curly, who, for forty years, led the fight for meager medical benefits, were, in essence, told “What have you done for me lately?” Just recently, the NFL, which makes billions of dollars per year, and was being publicly shamed by their founding fathers like Curly, threw some crumbs to the old timers.
Evidently, the NFL doesn’t have much use for “unproductive” legendary players, particularly ones with medical issues. Scott McMillan would be proud.
Personally, I believe America has the grit to survive this crisis without sacrificing the elderly, the handicapped, and, even, the lawyers.
Our first priority should be to save ourselves, because the people, of all ages, are the country. And, then, resurrect the economy…which is a product of the people.
The last thing we want to do, in this crisis, is lose our humanity.
On a positive note, sometimes, in crisis, great leaders are born, like Lincoln and Roosevelt.
Hope springs eternal.