It's too early to do this... The results will be terrible... You'll see...
Convention of States Action does not control and is not responsible for the content posted on this forum. The views expressed are those of the individuals making the post and do not necessarily represent the views of COSA or its staff.
Too early? To open the states? (Sorry there wasn't much context so if that's not what you're referring too feel free to ignore me)
Just some things to consider:
According to an analysis of worldwide death statistics it was noted that in almost every country the virus trends towards a peak infection rate at around six weeks in and starts dropping off from the eighth week. Additionally this holds true for both countries that applied aggressive lockdowns and/or social distancing as well as countries that didn't close down their economies at all.
Furthermore the virus still spreads in cities that are locked down, and even with the measures that we have the best possible outcome is only that we "flatten the curve" or slow down the rate at which people are infected. No one is arguing that these measures can actually stop the spread. So continuing the lockdown only serves to hurt the economy and increase joblessness (we are getting very close to 1 million people losing their job per week in America and the government does not have the resources to provide for everyone indefinitely).
Since we have (at best) only tools to slow down the spread the question is, "is it worth risking the destruction of the US economy for less infections?" If the initial projections of this virus killing millions of Americans were true then a strong case could be made for that. But with all the new data coming in that suggests that this may basically only be as bad as the regular flu it's REALLY difficult to make the case that we should be taking such extreme measures of something that's roughly no worse than what we already deal with on a yearly basis.
Right now I think the burden of proof is on anyone who would insist that the country should remain locked down. And to be clear, I don't know that anyone is arguing that literally every single place should open up immediately and entirely. If an area is being hit particularly hard and hospitals are in real danger of being overwhelmed then a case can be made to enforce social distancing and shelter at home orders to avoid the collapse of the medical system. But most areas in the country are not at risk of that or are past that point. Hence, it's time to open up.
There was all the "context" that was needed to say what I wanted to say. I'm not interested in an argument. It won't change anything...
Anyways, it's fine if you don't want an argument and I'll respect that. I guess the sheltering at home orders must be making life pretty boring though if you've found yourself coming on a site with people advocating to open the states and starting a conversation that you don't think will change anything.
On the plus side it's the general forums, I posted about what board games I've been playing during the shut down recently and if you want to hang out here there's no need to talk about reopening the borders if you don't want to. But, with my state announcing another extension to the shelter at home orders some friends of mine and I are going to find an online game to play together. Hope you have a good weekend :)
Your recap is excellent. let’s forgive the authorities for over-reacting to a novel virus. We get it. Now it’s time to OPEN THE STATES, fully and without conditions. Protect the vulnerable and let everyone else get back to work. Who else is going to dig us out of this Grand Canyon size financial hole? If that’s even possible. God bless America and her citizens.
It's too early to do this... The results will be terrible... You'll see...
Updated May 1, 2020, 04:46pm EDT TOPLINE As some states begin to relax lockdown orders and allow businesses to reopen, a new report from the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM) on Friday found that reopening before June could save 18 million jobs but also result in over 200,000 additional COVID-19 deaths.
Technically that's not what it says. Ignoring for a moment the fact that the data they are using for their model isn't including antibody testing and is skewed towards a higher mortality rate, nothing in their report indicates that there will be any additional infections. Simply that the projected amount will be higher.
Remember that social distancing and shutdowns are not designed to (and can't) stop the spread of COVID-19. They are simply there to slow the spread so that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. The only way that deaths (in theory) will be prevented is if we slow it down all the way until we get a vaccine. But at this point we don't know when that will be or if we will ever have one (there's reasons to be hopeful at this point but it's not a guaranteed thing).
And since a vaccine isn't projected to be available until 2021 at the soonest... we are talking about 8 more months of lockdowns at a minimum. If we do that our entire economy, health care system and government aid structure would collapse essentially crippling America.