- Re: Excellent indeed -- so why support the economically disastrous lockdowns? Archived Message
Posted by Willem
on April 27, 2020, 9:42 pm, in reply to "Re: Excellent indeed -- so why support the economically disastrous lockdowns?"
|
Well, even just supporting the lockdown (given a benevolent government) is not that clear. Somebody, or more likely, the great masses, will ultimately have to pay for bailing out the whole population. Which is also I think why the WHO said in their October 2019 study that this option is only the last step to take for an extraordinarily severe pandemic. At the very least a proper assessment of how much damage (overall) results from a lockdown is required. The "calamity in overwhelmed hospitals" of which you speak has to be estimated and put against the total damage done. To add to that; "no lockdown" does not have to mean "do nothing". All sorts of things could be put in place -- eg for those living with older/vulnerable people, special consideration could be given. Maybe allow those off work; it will have a much smaller impact than keeping everyone off work. Don't forget, infections can spread fast in households with everyone in close contact 24/7. Sometimes I think that's a real aim of the lockdown (for certain people) -- letting poor large families infect each other. A final point re kids (which I have): many kids are now spending large amounts of their time behind computer screens, not seeing friends, being bored, and growing up in a climate of fear. We may be doing more harm overall to them with a lockdown than without. |