4 ms·

Speaking of good faith, I think it’s a bit disingenuous to claim that lockdowns and similar actions did not have a significant impact for a year or more. Even i

Speaking of good faith, I think it’s a bit disingenuous to claim that lockdowns and similar actions did not have a significant impact for a year or more. Even if people were not under a strict lockdown mandated by law, many were impacted by work reduction, job loss, etc.

Brendinooo 5y ago
> to claim that lockdowns and similar actions did not have a significant impact for a year or more I'm not claiming this. I'm trying to point out that "lockdown" evokes particular policies and imagery while acting rhetorically as an amorphous catch-all. What is a lockdown? Is it "restriction of movement", "any policy that attempts to slow the spread of Covid", or something in between? I mean, I don't think Iowa ever implemented a stay-at-home type of policy. But based on that primary source linked in another comment, they had an increase in overdoses. Does FEE engage with that at all? Furthermore, there was an unknown deadly virus in our midst. If the government had taken no action at all, do you really think that there would have been no disruption, no job loss, no increase in overdose deaths?