3 ms·
>>The virus is responsible for the economic issues. Lifting the government mandated lockdowns will not change the presence of the virus. The lockdown undoubted
by CryptoPunk 6y ago
>>The virus is responsible for the economic issues. Lifting the government mandated lockdowns will not change the presence of the virus.
The lockdown undoubtedly magnifies the economic damage, given it prevents many people who would otherwise be working, from working, and businesses that would otherwise be operating, from operating.
The only possible rationale I can imagine you having for believing the economic damage without the lockdowns would be the same/worse is that the virus would have hurt productivity even more than the lockdowns did, by killing workers.
But the virus has an extremely low mortality rate for those of working age, and especially those in good health who are disproportionately represented among the most productive, so I don't know how you could reason that absent the lockdown, productivity might have taken an equivalent or larger hit due to more people being infected.
- jjeaff 6y agoOverrun hospitals with refrigerator trucks parked outside to handle all the dead bodies would probably have a similar affect to the lockdowns. People would become very nervous about participating in the economy. Younger individuals and children would die due to lack of hospital resources. And large loss of life would cost quite a bit economically as well.
- CryptoPunk 6y agoThe IFR of the coronavirus is likely below 1%, and it disproportionately impacts the very old. Many would continue going out and engaging in productive activity, albeit with perhaps more precautions, absent a lockdown. Looking at the available data, it's highly likely that herd immunity, and the decline in the number of deaths per day, would emerge very quickly, and then most people would carry on with their lives.