Yeah, I just think we're not really anchored as a society, or even within ourselves, as to what we're wanting and what goalposts for improvement are. I'd say that this is a bait and switch, but that would imply that this is more sinister than it really is, but I do think it conveys the point, at least superficially. The reasons we responded the way we did are very, very different than the reasons we're now giving for staying the way we are. We got into this for "15 days to flatten the curve" because we didn't want the excess deaths of overwhelming the healthcare system. When the deaths starting taking a huge dive, we pivoted to "OMG look at this guy who was hospitalized for a long time" or "OMG this guy still can't smell." I've made the analogy to the Conley trade previously. We had certain expectations of Conley that clearly haven't played out at all. But we rationalize "hey, look, he's averaging 16 ppg over ____," when in reality, had we been told at this time last year that we'd be sitting there celebrating him scoring "16 ppg over the last ____," everyone would have said hell no to the trade. But when we're facing the reality of us having traded for him, we're trying to save face by rationalizing his play. But that doesn't mean that Conley sucks, that he's worthless, or that there can't be good, just as COVID isn't a hoax, has killed many people, and is not something we should take callously.
I don't want to be in an automobile accident, either. And simply looking at 40k automobile fatalities each year doesn't tell the whole story, because 4.4 million people per year are involved in a motor vehicle accident that requires medical attention. But, you know, we drive.