4 ms·
You are also describing reasons why Sweden went for this strategy - their availability of space, limited physical contact etc. The argument is whether the strat
by manojlds 6y ago
You are also describing reasons why Sweden went for this strategy - their availability of space, limited physical contact etc. The argument is whether the strategy is working or not for Sweden vs a full lockdown in Sweden and not whether Sweden's strategy would have worked in other countries.
- black_puppydog 6y agoThis would be okay if the strategy was explicitly "we will let people die and then hope that everything goes well once everyone's outdoors in summer." At least then people would honestly debate whether that's a morally/economically solid stance to take. But in that case they'll also have to explain what their strategy will be at the end of summer.
- Ma8ee 6y agoThey have been very transparent what the strategy is. Long term, since this won’t go away in just a few months the restrictions must be sustainable. Take into account the overall health and well-being of the people, don’t worry only about COVID-19. Only do what there are scientific evidence that it actually makes a difference. Make sure that the spread is slow enough so the health care system doesn’t get overwhelmed.
- mixmastamyk 6y ago> Take into account the overall health and well-being This is a very concise way of putting what some believe is the best plan, thanks.
- whydoyoucare 6y agoI don't think there is any clear or morally unambiguous answer to the first part ("we will let people die"). It simply is either people die now of virus, or die later of economic fallout. Also see the Trolley Problem [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem