4 ms·
That's a very interesting graph, but I think it's not a complete story. Here's another graph: https://www.endcoronavirus.org/countries https://www.endcoronaviru
by geofft 6y ago
That's a very interesting graph, but I think it's not a complete story. Here's another graph: https://www.endcoronavirus.org/countries https://www.endcoronavirus.org/countries
In particular, compare Sweden and the US with other countries (Norway, perhaps, or South Korea).
Given the lack of correlation between government lockdown policy and public transit ridership, there's a couple of conclusions you could draw. One, as the author does, is that government lockdown policy doesn't effect behavior. Another, based on the second graph, is that none of the four cities the author shows had a meaningful government-mandated lockdown - that yes, as the author says, people didn't change behavior on their own, but that we can't conclude that government has no leverage here because none of those cities tried very hard. (As an NYC resident I can tell you that the government is sitting quite firmly in the unfortunate valley between leaving people alone and actually having an effect: there's a lot of people out of work and enough stories of nonsensical policing like throwing people in a crowded jail for not social distancing, but there are a lot of people, including our mayor himself, who are out and about in public that it isn't obviously helping with R₀.) Another possible one is that public transit ridership is a limited subset of behavior and changes for its own reasons (it's hard to maintain social distance and avoid touching metallic surfaces on a subway train) that don't necessarily track whether people are staying home or whether they're going around by means other than public transit.
While I do agree with the author that the model of the government having a magic lever is simplistic, I also don't think it follows that the government has no leverage. There are a number of policies well within the powers of government, from unemployment eligibility to literally giving out food, that I'd think have a much more effective influence on whether people stay home than whether they're told to stay home. (I suspect the author will agree with me that it's better to use government levers other than "we'll send armed men after you if you don't," if you have any.) The lockdown protests from people who want to return to work (to be distinguished from the protests from people who want others to return to working for them) are from people who need to work to survive and don't have remote work options - there are other things the government could do to meet the underlying demands besides saying, okay, you can go to work. In general, it's not that they want to leave their house, it's that they have to.
And while I do agree with the author that it's the people and not the government who make or break the lockdown (see also Hong Kong, where the citizenry realized that their government wasn't taking the problem seriously, for a particularly good example), I don't really think that ends the debate at all. I think the author is pretty wrong about whether it's safe to send kids back to school, for instance!
- djsumdog 6y agoI don't think graphs like the one you linked are helpful. Cases are always going to keep going up with additional testing. Cases need to be graphed lithographically to be able to see when trends are dropping, and it's more important to look at fatalities than case loads. I really like this visual: https://covidly.com/graph?country=United%20States#growth https://covidly.com/graph?country=United%20States#growth
- geofft 6y agoThe point I was trying to make with that graph is that cases in Norway, South Korea, etc. aren't going up - they're pretty firmly going down. (And, in turn, that government policy probably has something to do with it.) Maybe I'm not understanding your rebuttal / how to use the graph you linked? (e.g., type "Norway" and "Sweden" at the bottom, do the graphs not reflect a meaningful difference between those countries?)
- GekkePrutser 6y ago> The lockdown protests from people who want to return to work (to be distinguished from the protests from people who want others to return to working for them) are from people who need to work to survive and don't have remote work options - there are other things the government could do to meet the underlying demands besides saying, okay, you can go to work. In general, it's not that they want to leave their house, it's that they have to. That's not the only reason for people to protest it. I can work from home just fine, but the lockdown is really hurting me because I already suffer from depression and the last 2 months of solitary confinement hasn't done me any good (to say the least). I would go to the office if I could, I really need the social contact. I know some others in work feel the same. There wouldn't be that many of us so it would be pretty safe anyway. It would make sense to let the people who are willing to risk it return to work first. To be honest a few more months of this carries a much higher mortality risk for me than that virus. As a result I'm not worried about that. I'd rather run a small (and pretty preventable with hygiene measures) risk of dying free than my mental health declining rapidly from being locked up. I'm careful around other people anyway. I also think the "public health above everything" mentality that's prevalent now is a bit hypocritical, as most countries have been heavily cutting healthcare spending over the last years without much uproar. Trump himself has been gaining popularity by denying people healthcare over the past years (think Obamacare). Overdoing (and criticising others for less actively implementing) the covid measures is just the latest "cool" politically-correct thing people want to be seen doing. Like when everyone was buying electric cars to show how much they cared about the environment (even though not buying a car but using public transport was still a lot better for it!) What I mean is that here there's been a lot of threads in the local forums of people speaking shame about others not wearing masks, some people have even started logging statistics and taking photos. Whereas masks are not mandatory here and are in fact very hard to get. I just hate that 'holier than thou' attitude. The situation in the hospitals is now well under control here, which is what we were told it was all about.