Also California is reopening since all their predictions turned out to be way off the mark.
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/california/story/2...
I expect we have a few weeks until we have nearly 0 restrictions in place.
> https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/california/story/2....
says nothing like that.
> California recognizes that economic restrictions are causing severe harm and began rolling them back today
But the OP wrote,
> Hopefully states like California that are following more conservative, evidence-based approaches to relaxing restrictions, will relieve some of the tension.
You are both correct: California is rolling back economic restrictions, but they are following a conservative, evidence-based approach to relaxing them. The OP's basic premise, however, is not at all false, and I sincerely hope you don't have the impression that the state is just throwing a switch and going back to "normal." It's not.
Or I should say, we're not. I don't know where you're located, but I'm in California -- the Bay Area, specifically. We don't even have official guidance on how restaurants are going to re-open yet, an the California Restaurant Association -- the business group that represents restaurants, and clearly has an economic motivation to get back to business -- has actively lobbied for the re-opening of their member businesses to happen slowly and very carefully.
I would like nothing more than to be able to start going back to my favorite restaurants and bars. But the reality is that for the last month, the daily number of new Covid-19 cases and of deaths hasn't been materially dropping in the US in the way it has in countries like the UK, Italy, and Germany, which strongly suggests that our collective behavior throughout April remained too relaxed in most states. The paradox of this pandemic is that the looser the restrictions we place on ourselves are, the more economic damage we're likely to face over the long term, not less, because we'll start cycling through repeated outbreaks, being forced to close businesses, districts, and even regions ad hoc, and running a much greater risk of overwhelming hospitals with bursts of new cases virtually all at once in stricken locales.
What I don’t quite understand is how people expect the economy to “just go back to normal”... like, even if you “reopen” everything, ease all restrictions, it’s not like people are goingback to living as usual.. they’re still going to keep by themselves, because that’s an individually sensible decision... are you going to attend a conference, a wedding, a dinner party / restaurant where you’ll be near 100+ people? Of course not, you’ll be making sure you stay healthy! The economic damage will happen and persist, and governments can’t just legislate against that!
Yes, yes, and yes.
As will you.
I remember hearing a story of a solder that sent a single bullet into a pole mounted transformer. The oil leaked out, it over heated and exploded. Power went out to the block, maybe taking connected devices with it.
A two second act that cost less than a dollar, destroyed something that was orders of magnitude more expensive and took orders of magnitude more time to put in place.
Our choices since then have been "economic hardship and misery" or "economic hardship and misery with a spicy side dish of death and suffering". Covid19 has been the leading cause of death in America for a month now [1]. Some time tomorrow, it will have killed a confirmed 80,000 Americans [2] and America has consistently had 1/3rd of the world's critically-ill cases for weeks [ibid]. There is no way we are going to get out of this with less than 100,000 dead.
Amazingly, the same country that had endless investigations into the deaths of two people in Benghazi and went to war over the deaths of 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001 -- subsequently spending $6.4 trillion in war operations [3] -- is finding 100,000 dead to be "pretty good", and the economic cost of mitigating further death to be just a little bit too expensive.
As usual, some of this is explained by political misinformation campaigns that too many people are falling for [4][5][6][7], but still, the same talking points get repeated into forums like this one, even though most Americans would prefer economic pain over a higher death toll for now [8][9][10].
I'm just gobsmacked that the disinformation is taking root so easily, because arguing that can really trivially be reduced to, "I don't think enough people are dying to justify the measures meant to prevent people from dying."
Hopefully states like California that are following more conservative, evidence-based approaches to relaxing restrictions, will relieve some of the tension.
[1]: https://thehill.com/homenews/news/492053-coronavirus-now-lea...
[2]: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
[3]: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/20/us-spent-6point4-trillion-on...
[4]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-the-conservat...
[5]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/04/19/pro-gun...
[6]: https://www.vox.com/2020/4/19/21225195/stay-at-home-protests...
[7]: https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2020/0...
[8]: https://www.newsweek.com/americans-coronavirus-restrictions-...
[9]: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/08/us/politics/coronavirus-r...
[10]: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/most-americans-think-it...