Quote:
Originally Posted by legion
We have 7 cases in my county. None of them are in any hospital. Yet according to the experts above, I'm to stay locked in my house indefinitely because of that. There is zero evidence for the claims that led to the lockdown. The actual death rate experienced is an order of magnitude lower than what was claimed. This whole thing has been grossly unconstitutional and I think some elected officials should be made to pay. Quarantines are for keeping sick people in their houses, not healthy people. It's like locking up law-abiding citizens because officials fear a crime wave.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by legion
Not to mention the excuses for stripping rights from citizens are being constantly revised. First we had to flatten the curve, but the curve is so flat that judging any benefit is impossible. Then we were told that the peak is yet to come, despite evidence that the peak was weeks ago. Now we are being told that there is a second wave coming. I'm sure there will be a new excuse next week.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by legion
We were told that they all had to be cancelled so that hospitals would not be overwhelmed. Locally, we had 3 people in the hospital with severe coronavirus at the peak--spread between 2 hospitals. Business could have continued as usual and this would have had zero impact.
|
I disagree with that. We don't know what the outcome would have been had business continued on as usual. Maybe the low number of infections in your neck of the woods is due to social distancing. Maybe business as usual would have allowed the virus to spread like wildfire, as it did in New York. Take a cavalier attitude, and that's what gets you outcomes such as Italy and Spain?
Quote:
Originally Posted by legion
Exactly, people are free to take action based on their personal risk level, risk preference, and personal circumstances. Most people will do what is right for them.
|
That's exactly the problem. Most people look no further than the ends of their own noses. I'm cynical; I think people are inherently selfish. People worry about themselves--maybe their extended families--but certainly not society as a whole. I'm young enough that even when I catch this it probably won't kill me. But what about my parents? What about a couple of the older people with whom I work? So without some sort of government mandate to stay at home, we have numbskulls partying on the beaches of Florida for Spring Break because nothing's gonna stop them from enjoying Spring Break. They don't understand this is not about you, it's about society as a whole. One problem with this disease is that there are so many asymptomatic carriers, which emboldens people to act in ways that spreads the disease to others who are not so fortunate. People may do what they think is right for them, but to the detriment of others. And that's not a guess--that's cold hard science.
I understand the concern about unconstitutional restriction of civil liberties. I'm willing to give the government a little bit of leeway in this unusual circumstance. But like you, I don't like how the government either gives little/no insight into what parameters or metrics it will take to reopen society (or gives mixed messages such as POTUS vs state vs local governments). I'm also frustrated by how officials seem to give a new reason every couple weeks for maintaining social distancing (or even increasing the restrictions). It's like they haven't thought this whole thing through. I mean, from an epidemiological perspective, didn't their genius advisors consider these scenarios of first wave, flattening the curve, second wave and their rough timelines within about the first week of recognizing this problem? But I guess I shouldn't be surprised, as politicians usually lack foresight in most things.