4 ms·

Lockdowns in South Korea and Australia have unambigously halted outbreaks. Your argument makes sense as far as the initial plan was, but it is clear in hindsigh

Lockdowns in South Korea and Australia have unambigously halted outbreaks. Your argument makes sense as far as the initial plan was, but it is clear in hindsight that lockdowns can effectively stop the outbreak and thus will actually lead to reduced cases. Just because America has failed utterly to stop it's outbreak doesn't mean it isn't possible.

konjin 6y ago
Ah yes, the great roaring success that is the Australian lock down: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/18/hotel-quarantine-linked-to-99-of-victorias-covid-cases-inquiry-told https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/18/hotel...
- ImaCake 6y ago
  That is a failure of hotel quarantine. The lockdown that followed was harsh and it worked. I am in another Australian state, the lockdowns have been lifted and I can go to work with little fear of contracting COVID.
  - konjin 6y ago
    >I am in another Australian state, the lockdowns have been lifted and I can go to work with little fear of contracting COVID. Try living under curfew for a few months and see if you still think that keeping 10000 people in their 80s alive for another two years is worth it.
thu2111 6y ago
Halted for how long? It only takes one person or fomite to come in and create a new outbreak that spreads before it's detected. America isn't special in any regard. Only a tiny number of countries are pursuing lockdown-until-vaccine as a strategy, as it's obviously a bad one. It's worth noting that nobody until very recently was claiming lockdowns could eliminate outbreaks. That whole notion was deemed absurd as recently as June. The problem is obvious - for as long as there is a pool of people, somewhere, spreading the disease, and a large pool of people who haven't developed immunity, and international travel, then the virus will get in. Meanwhile lockdowns have catastrophic consequences far in excess of their benefits (halting COVID is not very important given how mild it is).

konjin 6y ago

Ah yes, the great roaring success that is the Australian lock down: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/18/hotel-quarantine-linked-to-99-of-victorias-covid-cases-inquiry-told https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/18/hotel...

ImaCake 6y ago
That is a failure of hotel quarantine. The lockdown that followed was harsh and it worked. I am in another Australian state, the lockdowns have been lifted and I can go to work with little fear of contracting COVID.
- konjin 6y ago
  >I am in another Australian state, the lockdowns have been lifted and I can go to work with little fear of contracting COVID. Try living under curfew for a few months and see if you still think that keeping 10000 people in their 80s alive for another two years is worth it.

thu2111 6y ago

Halted for how long? It only takes one person or fomite to come in and create a new outbreak that spreads before it's detected. America isn't special in any regard. Only a tiny number of countries are pursuing lockdown-until-vaccine as a strategy, as it's obviously a bad one. It's worth noting that nobody until very recently was claiming lockdowns could eliminate outbreaks. That whole notion was deemed absurd as recently as June. The problem is obvious - for as long as there is a pool of people, somewhere, spreading the disease, and a large pool of people who haven't developed immunity, and international travel, then the virus will get in. Meanwhile lockdowns have catastrophic consequences far in excess of their benefits (halting COVID is not very important given how mild it is).