I agree we don't want to let the solution be worse than the cause but.....
Sycraft (Administrators; 21148)
Posted on: 03-23-2020 11:03.
Client: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/80.0.3987.149 Safari/537.36 Edg/80.0.361.69
Message views: 12 (Score: 0 Protected)
We have to go with the best advice from experts on that. We also don't necessarily have to shut everything down if we can get our testing in check. Look at SK for an example of that. If we can keep track of who is infected, we can do more targeted shutdowns, however at this point most places don't seem to be able to get on top of testing.
The other thing to consider is just how bad it could get if we don't do anything and what that could do to the economy: There are a lot of cases that are survivable, but require hospitalization. If we just let it go wild, then most if not all of those people are going to die. Projections are deaths that are like WW2 or higher. That is going to have a major economic impact. Also because of the way exponential spread works, you'd be talking about a situation where most people would get it all at once. So you'd literally have 90%+ of your workforce, police, military, etc taken out of commission at the same time.
Nobody has all the answers, even the experts, and nobody knows for sure what will happen. But I think ultimately all we can do is take the best advice the experts give.
You do not have the required security level to post to this thread.
Report a Bug!