My neighborhood might comply, but there's a real risk that police state tactics would lead to massive social unrest, rioting, and total economic collapse in pockets across the country. If anyone thinks this is impossible, may I refer you to the 1960's.

On the other hand, what the authoritarian minded commenters seem to miss is how powerful social pressure and distributed decision making can actually be.

Much of this hinges on how it's done. First, you can't take away rights unless there's a compelling governmental interest. This interest clearly exists; however, it still doesn't fly UNLESS you restrict rights by the least restrictive means possible.

By trying voluntary restrictions first, they can demonstrate that these lesser restrictions were ineffective, and then successfully defend the more aggressive mandates in court if necessary, later.

If anything it should be the elderly and vulnerable that are forced to isolate while the rest of society slows down for awhile, but even that I think is too egregious at this point.

You sound as if you're ok with millions of people dying miserably.

You think a long period of decreased economy is bad, the spike might cause outright panics and armed unrest.

We can print dollars, we can't resurrect the dead.

Also, how do you think we will be able to support and help those more vulnerable if we don't have any economic output? Will printing money make supplies appear from nowhere?

If you get critically sick or injured (not COVID19 related) and hospitals are overflowing, you will suffer when no one can see you because of COVID19 cases.

Essentially given a will, we could transition part of our economy to a war footing (against the virus). Do we have the will?

Or do we capitulate and decimate the population?

You think it can't get worse?

EDIT: a word

It's real easy to shut down businesses and livelihoods when politicians are not responsible for the economic fallout.