I agree.
Maybe, but that wasn’t the reason. The reason was to flatten the curve to keep the healthcare system from being overwhelmed. The process was remarkably successful on that goal.
And I think that is exactly what should happen The gradual-ness determined by states and locals based on their situations.
There are those who believe the actual occurrence of the disease is three times the known number. I see where recently in a plant in which there are some 3,000 employees, 400 or so tested positive for the disease but not one of them was symptomatic. 3x might be an underestimate. In NYC, apparently, 25% of the deaths were of nursing home residents. It does seem as if there is a serious need to protect those people (and those of similar health who are nevertheless at home) but to let everybody else go to work with those cautionary measures you mention. It really isn’t going to do most people any good to continue lockdowns indefinitely.
That’s a “take my ball and go home” response to the discussion. We’re talking about a specific disease here. One that is spread by respiratory droplets.
I wouldn’t phrase it that way, but I agree if you substitute “lock away” with “wear a mask”.
No. Had we been able to identify the contagious, we would have only had to isolate them to flatten the curve.
And now we have this report that may indicate that the experts were wrong and that the lockdowns don’t work…F_Marturana:
Of course, this is unprovable. I posted lots of stats related to the fact that the economic destruction we have wrought will lead to even more deaths, but we are told “you can’t say for sure”. Technically true, but if history is an indicator, quite accurate.
The lawyers will be the last wave of the coronavirus outbreak, as the sue the surviving employers, and any drug companies. They will ensure more people lose their jobs.
Have any handy? It worked perfectly where I live.
This, I have no issue with. Why do you suppose a number of governors don’t take this approach, as opposed to determining what is and is not “essential?” (Which puts people out of work that don’t need to be…like bricklayers, or construction workers, etc) Those governors are acerbating the problem.
No, it isn’t. It is you are free to make choices. When government shuts down the economy, freedom to choose is removed by force. It may be the right decision, but the impact on individual remains
Almost always airborne, not on surfaces. Wear a mask and distance yourself reduces the possibility of droplets affecting you.
So, wearing a mask is sufficient if someone is positive? I think that might be insufficient.
It isn’t. Everyone should wear a mask. Now let’s open the economy.
And since we couldn’t, we shut down the economy to flatten the curve to keep the healthcare system from being overwhelmed.
Who said it should be opened wrong?
Which decision? Each state and locality should make the decision based on their situation. Trump was wrong when he said he had the power. States have the power and should make their own choices.
What hadn’t worked yet?
I view the ‘secular age’ exactly the opposite. It is the age of government induced conformity.
I think with the knowledge we have now, the smart policies for the time being will be based on protecting the vulnerable while continuing the economy, education and cultural life which protects us all.
The CDC also said at one point do not wear masks. It seems to me that might have been the single biggest error in the entire event.
So, you are attacking governors for doing what they think is right for their states.
Pushing what? Social distancing? Wearing masks? Going slow and careful with reopening? I don’t see any state that is being reckless. Not Texas, not Georgia, not Colorado. I don’t even think Cuomo was reckless for sending Covid patients back into nursing homes. But, then, I don’t see a place for political opportunism in this crisis. Some do, on both sides.
NO, everyone wear a mask because everyone could be positive. If you are positive, stay at home isolated from everyone.
In general, I think this is inevitable.