3 ms·

In a very real sense, what more have the "lockdowns" in the US been than "masks and social distancing"? In places where "social distancing" minimums have been

In a very real sense, what more have the "lockdowns" in the US been than "masks and social distancing"? In places where "social distancing" minimums have been impossible, the places have closed. I'm in one of the most strict places in the entire United States, but I can still go to most every store I want, including hair salons. I'm only barred from places where there's a LOT of breathing (gym, church with singing), tight confines where social distancing can't be done (bars, restaurants) or staying in a singular location for a long time (church, clubs, sporting events).

umvi 6y ago
> what more have the "lockdowns" in the US been than "masks and social distancing"? Destruction of the service industries? Educational handicaps on multiple generations of students? My point is that it's cheap to wear a mask and socially distance yourself while otherwise carrying on with life. It's extremely expensive on society to force everyone to stay home as much as possible and avoid certain businesses. It's expensive because it pushes the country more rapidly into debt, it pushes millions into poverty, it drives up suicide rates, and dozens more second and third order effects we won't find out about until the coming years.
- t-writescode 6y ago
  I would put schools under "places you can't reasonably social distance". That's why online school has been such a common thing; but, the United States isn't very good at it, and we haven't built out the appropriate social support structures and patterns (and have gone against those patterns in many cases), so it hasn't been especially viable. Remote learning was considered better than cancelling school altogether; but, then we ran into the problem of parents and children working and going to school in the same place and that came with its own burdens.
  - umvi 6y ago
    > Remote learning was considered better than cancelling school altogether But did we give enough thought to the third possibility? Just sending them to school normally with masks, periodically testing everyone, and contact tracing anyone who tests positive? Young people are surprisingly resilient to the disease, really just the teachers need to take extra precautions.
    - t-writescode 6y ago
      I admit that I know a teacher in that predicament in a school district that's been actively hiding their covid infection rate (fake testing, ignoring symptomatic children, etc) and several other of my family members are teachers working in hybrid situations, so I'm having a bit of trouble responding to this usefully as I know and hear from a teacher actively in harm's way.

umvi 6y ago

> what more have the "lockdowns" in the US been than "masks and social distancing"? Destruction of the service industries? Educational handicaps on multiple generations of students? My point is that it's cheap to wear a mask and socially distance yourself while otherwise carrying on with life. It's extremely expensive on society to force everyone to stay home as much as possible and avoid certain businesses. It's expensive because it pushes the country more rapidly into debt, it pushes millions into poverty, it drives up suicide rates, and dozens more second and third order effects we won't find out about until the coming years.

t-writescode 6y ago
I would put schools under "places you can't reasonably social distance". That's why online school has been such a common thing; but, the United States isn't very good at it, and we haven't built out the appropriate social support structures and patterns (and have gone against those patterns in many cases), so it hasn't been especially viable. Remote learning was considered better than cancelling school altogether; but, then we ran into the problem of parents and children working and going to school in the same place and that came with its own burdens.
- umvi 6y ago
  > Remote learning was considered better than cancelling school altogether But did we give enough thought to the third possibility? Just sending them to school normally with masks, periodically testing everyone, and contact tracing anyone who tests positive? Young people are surprisingly resilient to the disease, really just the teachers need to take extra precautions.
  - t-writescode 6y ago
    I admit that I know a teacher in that predicament in a school district that's been actively hiding their covid infection rate (fake testing, ignoring symptomatic children, etc) and several other of my family members are teachers working in hybrid situations, so I'm having a bit of trouble responding to this usefully as I know and hear from a teacher actively in harm's way.