It looks like the Swedish approach isn't working out so well, after all:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/c...19-policy-model-for-right-also-a-deadly-folly
One interesting thing I have noticed among the "open up and revive the economy" proponents is that they are using a straw man argument: "if we didn't force everyone to isolate, things would be just fine, except maybe a few extra deaths."
This is wrong on three counts:
- There aren't a few extra deaths, but a lot of them.
- The idea the economy would be ticking along just as usual if only we had no lock-down restrictions is completely naïve.
- The economic cost of all the dead people exceeds the economic damage caused by lock-down by a lot.
Does anyone really believe that, if we just "let her rip", people will continue to do what they normally do? Go to work every day, ignoring the fact that people are dropping like flies around them?
In reality, people will self-isolate—no matter what their government tells them to do—once things get bad enough. Impose no lock-down and, before very long at all, 20% or 30% (or more) of the population will have contracted the disease and missed two to four weeks at work. In turn, people get more careful, avoid contact with others, go out less, etc. Which means that all the same businesses go bust that go bust with a lock-down, such as restaurants, taxi services, airlines, etc.
Whether the government implements a lock-down or not, the result of the pandemic is a trashed economy, regardless. Except, with a lock-down, there are a lot fewer dead people.
https://theconversation.com/economi...w-economic-society-conversation-survey-138721https://micky.com.au/the-calculus-of-death-shows-the-covid-lock-down-is-clearly-worth-the-cost/